The Indianapolis journal., 1899-02-13

Because had been rude? Not blt Of It.
because Was doing thing that would be
called ridiculous Sn thus apologizng / did
not know / had so much respect Of middle
class notions before: this is my right hand
which l must cut off. Hold the arm, please
one twice, thrice; the offensive member Is
amputated: let us hope 1 shall never be
such a cad any more as 10 be ashamed OF
being gentleman.
A beautiful wood engraving Of Mary
Woolstoncraft, from a painting by John
Opie. forms the frontispiece of the February
Century. Some fine work of this class is
being done by this magazine. This number
of the magazine has several articles bearing
on the recent war. among them one entitled
How Other Countries Do It-An Inquiry
into the Consular System of Other Ma
tions," but prominence is given to other fea-
lures. One notable contribution is that by
James L. Hughes pointing out what a serv-
ice Dickens did TO childhood by portraying
the evils existing in schools and the meth
DDS of coercion used in the processes of edu-
cation. Says the writer: He took the most
advanced position on every phase of modern
educational thought, except manual train
ing. When he Is thoroughly understood he
viii be recognized as the Froebel of Eng
land" Mr.. Paul Leicester Ford is making
q very entertaining serial of his history OF
The Many-sided Franklin" Walter Well
man has a chapter of his experiences 'On
the Way to the North Pole" Among other
contributions are: Henry George in Cali
nor" "Harnessing the Nile" and several
short stories one of them an amusing
Christian Science" sketch by Lucy 5. Fur
man.
In the North American Review for Feb
ruary F. Spencer Baldwin, professor Of eco
nomics in Boston University, furnishes an
essay upon Some Aspects of Luxury"
The luXuries of the few In one generation.
declares he, become the common heritage
OF the many in the next. Luxury is a main
factor in the onward movement of the race.
1t stands for much of the beauty grace and
variety which alone make life really worth
the living. THE economist" he says, who
indicts luxury on the ground that it makes
men lazy loses sight entirely of the effect
of the prospect of luxury in making men
work. If luxury itself tends to slacken the
energies of individuals, the desire for lux
ury tends to quicken their energies. The
second tendency is at least as strong as the
nrst. am inclined to believe it the strong
er Men would probably work less rather
than more II the prospect of luxury were
taken away. A very powerful motive to in
6ustrial activity would thus be destroyed'
The second count in the economic indict-
ment of luxury-that ii retards the forma-
tion of capitals next examined. 1T may
be well to state at once" says Professor
Baldwin, that this charge is indisputably
true. Luxury does diminish the accumula-
tion of capital You can't both eat your
cake and save it. But is it sound social
economy to save as many cakes as poss-
BILE? This appears to me TO be a debatable
question:, he adds. and then goes on and
debates 1t in a fashion pleasing to those
who find 1t easy to spend and hard to save.
Whatever Jane Adams, Of Hull House,
has to say on the subject of philanthropy
is worth reading. She is not emotional non
sentimental, nor given in the least to gush:
she is sympathetic, yet at the same time
keAnly intelligent and controlled by common
sense, and In her labors among the poor
has made a study Of causes as we'll as OF
individuals and conditions. She touches in
her article in the February Atlantic upon
many things that puzzle and distress some
charity workers. but which are such subtle
problems that others, less sensitive, never
discover that they exist. One is the diff
Guilty experienced by the charity visitor OF
getting at the same point of view with
those whom she would benefit. Miss Ad-
dams has herself reached the point where
she can understand why family helped by
charity may use the money for recreation
and so be providing themselves with what
they are. nearly as much in need of as food
and clothing. She represents a charity as
ISOLATION and yet sees why system which
substitutes a theory of social conduct for
the natural promptings of the heart fails to
meet all requirements. by way or illuStra-
tion she says: THE poor man who has
fallen into distress, when he first asks aid,
instinctively expects tenderness, considera-
tion and forgiveness. If it is the first time,
it has taken him long to make up his mind
to the step. He comes somewhat bruised
and battered, and instead Of being met by
warmth of heart and sympathy he is at once
chilled by an investigation and intima-
tion that he ought to work. He does not
see that he Is being dealt with as a child or
defective will is cared for by stern parent
There have been no years of previous inter-
course and established relation, as between
parents and children. lie feels only the
postponement or refusal which he considers
harsh He does not live to thank his par-
ents for it, as the disciplined child is re-
ported to do, but cherishes a hardness OF
heart to his grave. The only really popular
charity is that of visiting nurses, who carry
about with them a professional training,
which may easily be interpreted into SYM
pathy and kindness, in their ministration to
obvious needs without investigation"