The Dominion. SATURDAY, JANUARY 6, 1912. THE GOLDEN RULE IN PRACTICE.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1330, 6 January 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, JANUARY 6, 1912. THE GOLDEN RULE IN PRACTICE.

A very remarkable letter printed in the New York livening I'ost in a prominent part of its issue of December 2 last gives an account of the unhappy fate of a man who attempteel to practise "the golden rule" of living foiv others. The letter, which occupies two and a half columns of space, concludes with an appeal for help—is, in one way, a begging letter of a most unusual kind.' The Posl gives but a very small section of its space on any day to letters to the editor, and it is the best newspaper in Amcrica, and one of the very finest newspapers of the world. The story tdld by its correspondent may therefore be accepted as true, and it is a distressing human document full of material for reflection. The writer begins: "Here is the most amazing thing that ever has come to my attention during, the forty-two ycaib of my life': a man ,who has helped the jjoor to the extent of a quarter of a million dollars and seven years' personal service, now brought to the point, through no fault or failure of his own, where he himself needs help and cannot get it!" He had never been "a religious enthusiast"; he "was a typical New York man of affairs—shrewd, resourceful, successful, and selfish," who "would not hesitate to take advantage in business within the law." Then, one day, he came across "a monstrous case of injustice and Wrong, culminating in poverty and suffering such as no living creature on earth, human or otherwise, should be called upon to endure." He was "dumb with wrath, racked with pity," and gave generously of his means "and called on others to give. When he finished this work he felt happy, and hoped to return to his own affairs and forget about it. But a second, and a third, and then other cases came to his knowledge, with the result that in seven years he gave away all his fortune of 250,000 dollars. His nature had been so transformed that he was unable any longer to live like the "typical New York man of affairs." Bringing morality and humanity into his conduct of his business, he went to the wall. For four years lie has struggled along, unable to deflect from his reading of "the golden rule," unable to obtain a helping hand from any quarter, and yet clearly conscious, so he says—and here there appears to be no doubt that he is. stating a plain fact, about which there need be no dispute—that if he chose to become the man he was he could succeed again easily. Even if the circumstances "of the publication of this story did not commend it for consideration as a chapter of real life, the story itself is obviously a possible one. The man says he still has faith, but he is puzzled, and he asks, "Why is the answer to the puzzle hidden from me'l Surely, if the facts are correctly stated, and the victim of the golden rule" has faithfully clung to his practice and really wiil not return to the life of "a typical New York man of affairs," he carries the answer with him. He is himself the answer to the problem that oppresses him. He has had his reward in the very misery of his 1 present circumstances—pennilessness. If one resolves to sell all he hath and give it to the poor, he cannot, as a man of sense, expect anything but poverty, or, as an honest man, honest with himself and with the world, expect that somehow, somewhere, his sacrifice shall be made good to him in a material way "by the world, or by some others who will be inspired to aid him. This man of New York has misunderstood "the golden rule." He is like a martyr who would expect to conic back to a comfortable iife after the flames that killed him have died down. There have been heroes and martyrs in every ago who have lived and died for individuals or nations or for mere ideas; and notone of them could ever have complained of his pains or even of his apparent failures. The hero or the martyr may tell his heart—sometimes, happily, lie iias been riglifc in this—that his selfishness will greatly and quickly help mankind; but it is of the essence of heroism or martyrdom to look to nothing but the sacrifice and the great need for the sacrifice. Everyone who is capable of thinking and anting othcrr/ltso than for kimacli &ad thos« few who &xc

parts of himself realises that he can do only a very little for humanity, and, when he can, he does it expecting no praise or blame. Ho knows be cannot matter much—that lie can matter, in fact, hardly at all—but big things arc the sum of an infinite number of infinitesimally small things, and that is enough "for the ordinary man who caies to do a little for the human race.

(( The New York man who has tried the golden rule'' and found it a failure—if he did not in his heart fear that it has failed, and that the world is leallv what Nietzsciib believed, ho would not have cried aloud a true representation of the sentimentalism of tho twentieth century. _ lie is puzzled because, after practising "the golden rule" for seven years, he can see no reward, nor any evidence that others will do for him what he did for his poor. Ho expected, that is to say, the working of a miracle by his own example. In other words, he is impatient of delay in the appearance of the spirit of 'auman goodness. That is tho evil of much of what the Americans call the "uplift" movement—its unwillingness to forgo immediate "dividends^ 1 on sacrifice and effort, and its fancy that humanity can slough its old skin at the waving of a wand or the passing of an Act of Parliament. In commenting upon one of the scries of miich-discusscd addresses by the Dean of St. Paul's, Dr. Inge, the London Timis said; "An immense hope has traversed the world, and, if now it seems delusive, it is likely to be followed by a despair no less immense. The modern world, as a whole, has committed itself to this belief in a continuous improvement; for a century or more men's hearts and minds have l?een fed upon it; upon that they have founded their faith in the ultimate righteousness of the universe, and if it crumbles away, what grounds of faith will be left to them This appears to us to be without any warrant from history or from the facts of to-day. What is "a century or more," in aiiy case? A breath only in the life of the race of man. Dit. Inge was far wiser:

"It was certainly not true that each generation showed an advance upon its predecessor. Somehow or other tile general movement of the race was upwards, not downward, and inspired prophets made good the losses of institutional religion. Human beings were supposed to haVo existed for 150,000 years, but civilisation had beou entirely the work of the last ten thousand years. Civilisation was probably only in its childhood, and the Church, so far from paying in the words of a foolish hymn, Tar down tho ages now, .Her journey well nigh done,' had only begun to crawl and babble. . . . The Spirit of the Ages was not going to luirry herself because they had only.seventy years or so in which to watch her operations. They must not forget that the spiritual sentie was a new endowment as compared with their eyes and ears and other senses, and looked at in that way- the 'history of religion was nnt depressing. In God's sight (he past and future were there all that time, and l!)ll was jtist as important or unimportant a year as 1811 or 2011. If they seriously believed in their own immortality they could feel that and take comfort in it."

But the modern "Social reformer" is too often like the New York man — ready to try a plan, ready very often to make or counsel a sacrifice, but not ready to dispense with instant results. The race of men remains unmoved, unchanged, and the instant results do not come; and the "social reformer" cries out and gives up humanity. It is arrogance in an atom.