Part 17

5. _The Preparation of the Teaching Plan._—The teacher should know not only what he is to teach, but _how_ he is to teach it; in what order of thought; with what opening sentences, illustrations, application, and closing utterances.

IV. _Hints on Preparation._—1. Begin early in the week, as soon after the teaching of the last lesson as possible. 2. Read the lesson often; at least once each day, and thoughtfully. 3. Pray much over the lesson; for by communion with the Author of the Word we enter into knowledge of the Word. 4. Use all the helps accessible, in the line of commentaries, Bible dictionaries, etc. 5. Study independently, using the thoughts of others to quicken your own thought, and not in place of it. 6. Talk with others about the lesson, in the family, in the teachers’ meeting, and in social life. 7. Do not expect to use all your material. All the knowledge gained will add power to the teaching of that portion of the knowledge imparted.

* * * * *

THE ART OF READING.—I used to believe a great deal more in opportunities and less in application than I do now. Time and health are needed, but with these there are always opportunities. Rich people have a fancy for spending money very uselessly on their culture because it seems to them more valuable when it has been costly; but the truth is, that by the blessing of good and cheap literature, intellectual light has become almost as accessible as daylight. I have a rich friend who travels more, and buys more costly things than I do, but he does not really learn more or advance farther in the twelvemonth. If my days are fully occupied, what has he to set against them? only other well occupied days, no more. If he is getting benefit at St. Petersburg he is missing the benefit I am getting round my house and in it. The sum of the year’s benefit seems to be surprisingly alike in both cases. So if you are reading a piece of thoroughly good literature, Baron Rothschild may possibly be as well occupied as you—he is certainly not better occupied. When I open a noble volume I say to myself, “now the only Crœsus that I envy is he who is reading a better book than this.”—_Philip G. Hamerton._

EDITOR’S OUTLOOK.

DRESS AND INCOME

Dress is fast becoming a science. Particularly is this true of the dress of women. The modern fashion magazine with its suggestions and plans, shows how nearly dress is a formulated science. All this is right and necessary. When used rightly there is no weapon in a woman’s hands more powerful than effective dressing. It makes even a plain woman attractive, and a fair one doubly so. It gives her a peculiar influence which every earnest, true-hearted woman should seek rather than avoid. To be effective, dress must be studied. But the thought which women give to dress leads them often to give it undue importance, to make it a paramount object rather than a means to influence. Most especially is this true among a large class of self-supporting women and wives of salaried men. The old charge of Polonius:

“Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy, But not express’d in fancy; rich, not gaudy”

is often literally carried out by them, and in many cases this class dresses in a more costly style and with more taste than any other in the community. Nor is it mere outside show. They do not wear silk dresses and coarse boots, nor velvet mantles and no gloves. Their wardrobe is almost invariably complete and in taste. They are sensibly, neatly and richly dressed women. They have studied and mastered the science of dressing well. They live within their incomes, too; but in almost every case their salaries give them nothing but food and raiment. At the end of a year, beyond their wardrobes and the amount of rather questionable prestige which their good clothes have given them in a certain circle—rarely a circle which is superior to their own—they have nothing, and here lies the wrong. No matter how small an income may be it ought to be so used that it will do more. If for a year’s work we have simply the necessaries of life, we have achieved small success. But few people put their money where it yields substantial return; few devote a fair portion of their earnings to increase the value of their work or to multiply implements of work. We rarely find persons who devote a fair amount of their salaries to charities, but we do often find salaries of from six hundred to one thousand dollars yielding seal-skin sacks and velvet gowns. Are such garments consistent with the steady course of self-culture which every person should pursue, or with the tithe which every moralist, not to say Christian, should devote to the world of woe about us? Common sense tells us that we can not live like the wealthy unless we are wealthy.

It is among the salaried class particularly that this evil exists. Perhaps the cause springs from the way in which they earn their livelihood. Money comes to them regularly and surely; they see no reason why it should cease, and so give less attention to strict economy than the man whose success depends upon the care and thrift with which he lives. Their future promotion depends upon their faithfulness, not upon their economy, so that often a man of moderate salary keeps a more expensive establishment than a man of moderate wealth. In the latter case future business advancement depends upon the amount he can save to invest, in the former simply upon his sticking to his work. Salaried people too often live like school boys upon their annual allowance. Whatever the cause, there is a large class of people among us much inferior to what they might be, both in usefulness and ability, simply from the wholly selfish expenditures of their incomes.

STEAM IS NOT AN ARISTOCRAT.

One of the careless outcries of dissatisfied persons is that the “rich are growing richer and the poor poorer.” This is half true. The rich are growing richer—and so, too, are the poor. The wealth of the world has been enormously increased, and all classes have profited by it. Even paupers fare better at public expense than they did fifty years ago. Steam has multiplied the world’s wealth. The increase is most conspicuous in the bank accounts of the rich. But the poor live in better houses, have better food and clothing, and get a good many things once considered luxuries. Doubtless some who cry “the poor are growing poorer,” have an honest fear that the tendency of things is to crush down into bitter poverty all but the few rich. They see the growth of large fortunes, but they fail to see the greater growth of general wealth, nor do they stop to figure out the problem. For example: Suppose Vanderbilt has $150,000,000. Then suppose it divided among 50,000,000 of people. We should get just _three dollars apiece_! Suppose that the very rich of the country are equal in wealth to twenty Vanderbilts—a very large estimate. Then, their united wealth, if distributed, would give us only _sixty dollars apiece_! That is the most we could get out of dividing up the big piles of wealth. Any one sees that it would not pay to divide. The rich have not a great deal of our money in their pockets—if they have any. For, an honest inquiry will show that the general average of wealth, and of all that wealth brings to us, is higher by a much larger proportion than that sixty dollars apiece represents. The worst view we can possibly take of it is that we have paid sixty dollars apiece, out of a vast increase in wealth, to men who have managed great enterprises that have enriched us all. _Perhaps_ these men have taken it all for nothing. Nobody believes it; but suppose they have. Then we have still obtained a great gain at small cost. We get, on the average, twice as much for our labor as people did fifty years ago. We live in more comfort than people used to do. We are not growing poorer. We raise here no question of monopolies. Our point now is that the poor are not growing poorer, but richer—that there is no such tendency at work in modern society as the one honestly feared by many—this piling up of all wealth in few hands. Steam is not an aristocrat, but a plain Republican who impartially helps us all when we help ourselves.

THE PRESENT POLITICAL OUTLOOK.

In a very few months we shall know the names of the presidential candidates, one of whom, in all probability, will be the next chief executive of the nation. The Republican National Convention has been called to meet in Chicago June 3, next. The calling of other conventions will soon follow. In a short time we shall have the candidates, and then will ensue a contest of which it is safe to predict that it will be close, exciting, and warmly fought. In contemplating the present political situation, we see it is little different from that of 1880. Less change has come in the quadrennium than might have been anticipated. The same two great parties confront each other, and their apparent relative strength is much the same as it was when last in the national arena they measured swords; it can hardly be said that there is greater likelihood of the success of either than there was four years ago. For years there has been no little talk about the old parties having done their work, and the time having come for them to die and new parties to succeed them; and yet, we enter the presidential campaign of 1884 with the two old parties in the field as influential as ever. Small progress, if any, has been made during the past four years in the work of bringing new parties to strength and prominence. The supersession of the parties which for so many years have been competitors for the reins of government is a thing of the future still, and seems a thing not of the near future. Of the new political organizations which from time to time have arisen, it is to be said that, generally, their strength is evidently waning rather than increasing. Some of them, in state elections, have held the balance of power and been important factors, but there is no probability that such will be the case in the approaching presidential contest. The influential parties of the past are the influential parties of the present. One of them is to win in November next, and both now appear with about the same chances of success as in 1880.

The fall elections of 1882 gave great confidence to the Democratic party. Their ticket in New York received 192,000 majority, in Pennsylvania 40,000, and in Massachusetts 14,000. They had some grounds certainly for the assurance that in the next presidential fight they would wrest from their opponents the power which had been theirs for more than a score of years. But the situation has taken on a decidedly changed aspect. From the state elections of October last, indeed, Democrats might still derive courage and hope. They carried Ohio, and showed much greater strength in Iowa than in former years; though, to be sure, causes for these results of a local and temporary character were not wanting. But the November elections served to render the prospects more dubious. In New York the Republicans elected their candidate for Secretary of State by 17,000 majority; in Pennsylvania their state ticket was carried by a majority of 16,000; and in Massachusetts Mr. Robinson was elected Governor over General Butler by a majority of 10,000. Virginia was carried by the Democrats; but this Democratic victory, it is well argued by a keen political writer, is to prove a real blessing to the Republicans by breaking the complications of their party with “Mahoneism” and repudiation. All things considered, then, neither party can be seen to have gained since the last presidential election, and to stand a better chance of success than four years ago. The “Solid South” is still solid. Not an electoral vote from the states once in rebellion will be given to the Republican candidates. Among many doubtful things, this at least is certain. The solid vote of the South is secure in the hands of the Democrats. In addition to this, they will need, to win, forty-five electoral votes from the North. If they are successful in securing these, the next incumbent of the presidential office will be a Democrat. The result of the approaching contest, since party issues of account are now notably wanting, must turn very much upon the character of the party candidates and the personal and official conduct of the representatives of the two parties at Washington in the intervening time. From what has been seen in New York, Pennsylvania, and other states, it is evident that there is a very large and growing body of voters in the land who will not be fettered to party, whether right or wrong. They claim the right to turn their backs upon their party when its action becomes offensive, and take an independent position. These “independents” hold the balance of power at the present time. They can give New York and Pennsylvania to either party; they can fix the result of the presidential election. If good behavior on the part of party leaders and the choice of unexceptionable candidates will secure their votes, it will certainly be good policy to make use of the measures.

SPANISH BULL FIGHTS.

There are found, even where we have the best civilization, some degraded classes who delight in cruel, bloody sports, in witnessing scenes most revolting to persons of humane feelings and better culture. But desperadoes, pugilists, and other fighting men, with those who have a fiendish satisfaction in the sufferings and blood of the dumb animals they torture, are counted alien from our Christian civilization. Their characters and their crimes are detested by all good citizens. But when deeds of cruelty and blood are not only endured and condoned, but raised to the dignity of national sports, it shows a state of society that can hardly be called civilized. Ancient Rome had her gladiatorial shows for the gratification of those eager to witness the bloody spectacle. The tournaments of chivalrous knights in the mediæval times, who slew each other as an exhibition of their strength and skill, were of the same character. In Spain and Portugal even to the present day bull fights are a national amusement, in which nearly all classes find pleasure. Our attention is just now called to this. A suggestive note from a gentleman of culture and refined sensibilities, says: “A king of Spain brought home a young wife, whose first duty was to give the signal for the beginning of a bull fight. The same monarch is visited by a German prince, in whose honor these brutalities are perpetrated on a more magnificent scale than usual.” And so it is. Alas for European civilization in the nineteenth century!

The preparation for these sports is extensive. The ring is of vast dimensions, in the center of which is a pit, or wide area, sunk in terraced granite, with galleries rising on all sides, sufficient to seat at least ten thousand people who usually crowd the place on Sabbath afternoon. The fighters and their assistants are trained to their business, and handle their weapons skillfully. Some are mounted on horses with long slender spears, used simply to torture and exasperate, but to inflict no deadly wound. The “killer” is a swordsman on foot, who baffles and confuses the bull, drawing his attention this way and that, playing his red cloak before his eyes, and watching his opportunity to plunge the sword to the hilt into the neck of the animal. They are well paid, and often amass large fortunes. But no verbal account of a bull tourney can present the rapid changes, the dangers and escapes, the skill, the picturesqueness, and the horror of the actual thing. The acts, brilliant or repulsive, occur in rapid succession, presenting only glimpses of dramatic, ghastly pictures, which fade out instantly to re-form in new phases. The poor, gaunt, dilapidated horses used are a cheap contribution to the occasion, and forced into position to be killed by the horns of the bull, as he, in turn, is doomed to die by the sword of the killer, with not the slightest chance to survive the bloody fray. A fierce, powerful bull has been known to kill five horses in ten minutes. The first rush against a horse is a sight horrible to witness. You hear the horns tearing the tough hide, crashing the ribs, dragging the entrails from the quivering body. When two or more of the poor animals are struggling on the earth in the ring, now reeking with blood, others, with bandaged eyes, and hideously gashed sides, are spurred and goaded on to a similar fate. A witness tells of seeing “a horse and rider lifted bodily on the horns, and so tossed that the horseman was flung from his saddle, hurtled over the bull, and landed solidly on his back, senseless.” The grooms bore him off white and rigid, but the eager spectators heeded him not. They were wildly cheering the bull’s strength and prowess. Occasionally a man is horribly mangled, killed in the ring, or maimed for life; so a surgeon attends in the ante-room, and (alas! the mockery,) a priest is at hand, with his holy wafer for the last sacrament in case of any accident to a good bull-fighting Catholic. Yet things so unutterably repulsive are witnessed with apparent delight by richly dressed Spanish gentlemen and ladies of the highest rank.

The performance, as at present maintained, is far below that of other days, when the nation had more vigor. The dumb animals are, by arrangements in the ring, put to a much greater disadvantage, and the necessity for great dexterity and courage no longer existing, the class of fighting men do not, in these respects, compare well with their predecessors.

Spain, once a powerful nation, having a class—not numerous—of highly cultivated citizens, and a literature by no means despicable, has fallen into a sad condition, neither respected nor feared as formerly. The brutal sports in which she delights could never be introduced or tolerated in really refined society, or by cultured people, but when retained as a relic of earlier barbarism they have an educating force, and nurture to still greater strength the evil passions that made them possible. Some things among us may have a dissipating, if not demoralizing, tendency, and should be abandoned. Our voice is not against all amusements. Innocent recreations are healthy. Our minds and bodies need them. Only let them be suitable, and of an elevating tendency.

EDITOR’S NOTE-BOOK.

The list of C. L. S. C. graduates of the class of ’83 is published in this number of THE CHAUTAUQUAN—1300 strong. The states represented are California, Maine, Virginia, Florida, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Minnesota, Maryland, Iowa, Illinois, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, Kansas, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia, Connecticut, Missouri, District of Columbia, New Hampshire, Colorado, Dakota, Kentucky. Canada is also represented, and in far-away China there is one graduate. The members are from thirteen different denominations: Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregational, Episcopal, Baptist, Christian, United Presbyterian, Reformed, Unitarian, Universalist, Friends, Roman Catholics, Seven Day Baptists. In its ranks are teachers, housekeepers, ministers, lawyers, clerks, students, mechanics, farmers, merchants, dressmakers, milliners, music teachers and stenographers.

* * * * *

The presidential campaign for 1884 was opened in December by the Republican National Committee fixing June as the time, and Chicago as the place for holding the National Convention. Chautauqua was discussed as a proper place for this convention to meet. The _Graphic_, of New York, furnished a number of good illustrations of the hotels, steamboats, and lines of railroads with which the Lake is favored, but these attractions were not strong enough—the atmosphere of the place is not the kind political conventions breathe. To be sure, President Grant and President Garfield both honored themselves and Chautauqua by visiting the Assembly, but a national political convention, even of the Republican type, would find “water, water, everywhere,” and nothing stronger to drink. Chautauqua is dead as a place for holding a national political convention.

* * * * *

James Russell Lowell, our Minister to England, enjoys so excellent a reputation in that country, that people who ought to know better, are beginning to talk about his “Un-Americanism.” It is a foolish business. Mr. Lowell is an American of the Americans. But Americanism does not consist in a capacity for getting the ill-will of foreigners, or in abusing them when one lives abroad. Mr. Lowell worthily represents the people of the United States among the English people, and the honors paid to him in choosing him to unveil the statue of Fielding, and electing him Rector of the University of Glasgow, are honors paid to this nation. There is no place for the petty jealousy of his growing popularity in England. It is a thing to be proud of. The author of the “Biglow Papers” will always be known on both sides of the ocean as a Yankee of the Yankees.

* * * * *

Somebody has said of the “House of Representatives,” “it is too big for business, too big for harmony, too big for economy, too big for any practical purpose whatever,” and the prospect is that it will be larger, rather than smaller. Speaker Carlisle found it almost unwieldy when he organized the four hundred and one members into committees. We venture the assertion that no officer in the United States Government in his official capacity passes through a more trying ordeal than the Speaker of the House. He must face his work every day of the session, in the hall where he presides; and as for ambition and jealousy, tact and skill in manipulation, the representatives of the people are so well along in all these things that to ask one man to appoint this company to places on committees, and then to legislate for the people, is too much. A new method of appointing committees ought to be adopted.

* * * * *

Mr George Ticknor Curtis has rendered the American public a valuable service in his two volumes on the life of James Buchanan, published by the Harper Brothers. If this material had been precipitated upon the public mind in the dark days of the civil war, it would have been as fuel to the flame of public passion, or if it had come to light even during the years immediately after the war, the result would have been much the same. Mr. Buchanan’s task during the last days of his administration was a hard one. He was expected to both _wait_ and to be in a _hurry_ in discharging his duties as President; besides, it required more than human sagacity to determine what would be the wisest course for his administration to pursue. The time when he vacated the White House, and Mr. Lincoln went into it, makes a joint in American history which must be studied as with a microscope, if the student would reach a correct judgment of the men who acted and the events that transpired. The correspondence which passed between Mr. Buchanan and several members of his old cabinet, after he retired to private life is like the glare of an electric light turned on those turbulent times. By these letters one can read his way out of the heretofore inexplicable darkness of those caverns of history.

* * * * *