air, as of one who could do much better if he tried; art and literature he considers mere frivolous toys for the pastime of fools; scientific discoveries he blandly depreciates, because they are likely to upset his pet theories of being "saved" or "damned," and he addresses himself to that very strange and specially invented "God" of his own persuasion, with a familiar coolness that would amount to blasphemy if it were the real God of heaven and earth with whom he thus presumes to "make conversation." I once heard a man of this sort saying grace in the following fashion:

"Lord, look upon this table and bless the meats Thou hast given us, so that they may nourish and sustain us without harm. Do, Lord! and be praised forever. Amen!"

No sense of reverence affected him, and certainly no sense of humor. The "Do, Lord!" uttered by way of persuasion to the Maker of all that is, in order that Divine attention should be centralized on his one table of food, so that the "meats" should "nourish and sustain" him without injuring his digestion, was sublimely ridiculous, only his "swagger" religion prevented him from seeing it. He was convinced that the Everlasting Power, which has set an infinity of worlds in harmonious movement to follow everlasting laws and perform everlasting work, ought to pay special attention to the meal he was just going to eat, even to taking care that it should not disagree with him! Pure "swagger" again, arising out of a narrow conception of Deity, and an overweening estimation of self. This attitude of mind is unfortunately encouraged by the Jewish Scriptures, which are really no necessary part of the Christian creed, according to the New Testament, unless we rank ourselves with the race that rejected and crucified Christ.

The conception of the Jewish "Jehovah" is little less barbarous than any MumboJumbo of a savage tribe. He is represented as an implacable, jealous, cursing, and pitiless tyrant, always needing sacrifices of blood-a fetish built up entirely out of the inventions of the wily priests of the East, who knew well enough that the sort of people they had to deal with must be controlled by fear. The easy familiarity with which Abraham and Moses "talked with God" was magnificent "swagger,' practised in order to terrorize and delude

the ignorant, a politic and diplomatic course of action that was absolutely necessary in those days. Moses particularly was the most superb as well as the most deeply learned "swagger religionist" of his time, for to his own native intelligence he added the subtle wisdom and learning of Egypt, gained by his bringing up and education in the palace of the Pharaohs. The world no longer needs an Abraham or a Moses, for Science has become our Prophet, and “talks with God" as no seer of either ancient or modern times could ever do. Our latter-day "swagger" religionists are jealous of Science, and no wonder. She, with a glorious conviction, points to our eternal progress from good to infinite betterment; she shows us that the Soul in all things is a soul eternally advancing; she proves to us that the Maker of Beauty and Designer of Order is no capricious, angry, vengeful, irritable Being, with a man's worst passions grossly exaggerated, but a Spirit of perfect love and goodness, whose Laws, if we only obeyed them, instead of trying to pervert and oppose them, would work together for our ultimate happiness.

We are, however, prevented from fully realizing this by our "swagger" religionists, whose first business is always to break up unity and sow discord. Even in an ordinary way the "swagger" forms of "High" Church are driving away simple rustic folk from their early faith and devotion. I could name three or four villages in my own neighborhood where the people will not go to church because of the "Romanizing" vicars. Personally, for the sake of the State, I should like to see the old Elizabethan order revived-namely, that the "Service of Common Prayer appointed to be read in the Church of England" should be strictly and literally followed to the letter by all the clergy without any exceptions, and that the people should be bound to attend church for the hearing of this service at least once on Sundays, under option of a fine for non-attendance; but that if the service was not read, as it was intended to be, simply and reverently, so that the congregation could hear it, follow it, and respond to it, and if any "swagger" ritual was introduced into it, then the congregation should be exempt from attendance, and the offending clergy liable to dismissal. Of course, this cannot be done now; churches and chapels are all at loggerheads with each other, and

we live in the same condition as when the French wit exclaimed of England: "Malheureux pays! Cinquante religious et une seule sauce!" The "fifty religions" are the work of our "swagger religionists," men who "pose" as having a special "call" or "mission" to assert themselves publicly as inspired by the Divine, and who try to form churches of their own; the "one sauce" is the result of the sheeplike tendency of an unthinking, unimaginative public, who will more readily break up their religious beliefs into swaggering, self-advertising sects than exercise any useful ingenuity in composing a new condiment. The position seems, and is, ludicrous, but it confronts us every day in its glaring absurdity as a grotesque and undeniable fact.

Real religion is like real love a secret of the heart and soul, treasured in the deepest and most sacred recesses of one's immortal conscience; and the less it is talked of, the more profound is its vitality and passion. I know persons famous in art, science, and in literature who are far more truly religious than many followers of a formulated creed, whose daily service

to the Creator is one of grateful worship and praise who see in every beautiful line of sky, landscape, or sea some fresh and gracious manifestation of eternal Beneficence, who never pray to be either excused or forgiven for their faults and follies, knowing that by law every sin carries its own punishment, and every virtue its own reward-who live their lives with a sweet, broad, and patient tolerance of such errors and foibles as are common to humanity, fully realizing that every error teaches experience, and every fall a surer footing,and who come very near to God in their uncontesting obedience to His laws, their gentle acceptance of His will, and the dignity with which they silently express their faith instead of "swaggering" it. The swaggers" in especial pulpits who advocate special and separate forms of religion are the murderers of true faith-they are the class of whom Christ said: "Ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men, for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." A religious hoarding with an "Ism" advertised on it is the sign of the Swaggerer, not of the Disciple.

DEE

EEP in the greenwood of my heart
Is my abiding-place:

I cloak my soul at feast and mart;
I mask my face.

Outlawed, but not alone, for Truth

Is outlawed, too.

You cannot banish us, proud world:
We banish you.

Go by, go by, with all your din,

Your dust, your greed, your guile, Your pomp, your gold; you cannot win From her one smile.

We banish you.

T

HE all-dominating fact in American life to-day is this: The average man does not receive— cannot secure a living wage. Three-fourths of our workers, toil they never so hard, receive less money than they must necessarily expend if they and their families are to maintain, under existing conditions, a decent standard of living.

Our land is supposed to be the Utopia of the laborer-the land where wages are high, where industry brings its sure reward, where the dinner-pail of the workingman is never empty.

And yet, if we accept the seemingly clear verdict of very sober and reliable statistics, the average American to-day is struggling on the verge of indigence.

If it can ever be said legitimately that a body politic suffers from one all-pervading malady, it would seem as if we are justified in saying that this economic maladjustment constitutes the social malady of America to-day.

The statistics to which I refer show, on the one hand, the cost of living in America; on the other, the earning capacity of the average American. Taken together, they appear to present a message that he who runs may read. Here is the evidence in brief:

First. In 1909, Dr. Robert C. Chapin made, under the auspices of the Sage Foundation, an elaborate investigation on conditions of life among working families in New York City. He summarizes his conclusions thus:

"The task of making both ends meet in New York City is too severe to be successfully accomplished in ordinary circumstances on all incomes under $800 without a

lowering of the standard of living, the normal demands of health, working efficiency, and social decency.

"On the other hand," the report continues, "an income of $900 or over probably permits the maintenance of a normal standard, at least so far as the physical man is concerned.

"An examination of the items of the budget shows that the families having from $900 to $1,000 a year are able, in general, to get food enough to keep soul and body together, and clothing and shelter enough to meet the most urgent demands of decency."

This is the debit side of the ledger. The vital question then became: What proportion of families are able to secure the $900 necessary to "meet the most urgent demands of decency"?

Second. In order to answer that question, and thus supply the ledger with a credit side, Mr. Scott Nearing made an exhaustive study of the incomes actually received by wage-earners in many parts of America. He utilized a variety of sources and collated them with great care and skill. His results, published in September, 1911, tell for the first time what is the average income of the American wage-earner.

The results are summarized thus: "Half of the adult males of the United States are earning less than $500 a year; three-quarters are earning less than $600 annually; nine-tenths are receiving less than $800 a year; while less than ten per cent. receive more than that figure.

"A corresponding computation of the wages of women shows that one-fifth earn less than $200 annually; that three-fifths are receiving less than $325; that ninetenths are earning less than $500 a year;

the cost of living there is supposed to be high. Investigation shows, however, that the discrepancy, for the average man, is not so great as is often alleged. Mr. Nearing considers that the $900 budget "is not excessive for Boston, Buffalo, and Chicago; that it is low for Pittsburgh, and probably a little high for Philadelphia and Baltimore. In other words, it is a fair average for the great cities east of the Mississippi, and north of Virginia." In the case of the great suburban and rural population, the reduction of the budget through lower rents and different standards is certainly not greater than $100 or, at the extreme, $200. An independent investigation has shown that there are cities where food prices are higher than in the metropolis.

more favorable than in any other region. Ex-Governor Coe I. Crawford presented such a case in a speech delivered in the United States Senate not long ago. Senator Crawford is not an alarmist; he is a very sober economist, who is certainly entitled to speak with authority of the conditions in the Middle West. Here is what he says:

"Last year a young brakeman on a passenger train on which I was riding in the state in which I reside [South Dakota] and whom I knew to be a young man of good habits and industry, told me that he was getting $60 a month. He said that both he and his young wife practiced the most rigid economy and did not spend even a nickel without considering very carefully what it would buy.

sisted only of a wife and one child. The case is presented as typical by a careful and authoritative student of affairs. Other investigators report that conditions are no better in the South. In Atlanta, for example, prices range higher than in any Northern city.

hundred

dollars.

that this

debt,

added to

So we may safely assume on the totality of the evidence that from $700 to $900 a year represents for an average family the minimum cost of decent living anywhere in America.

his usual household expenses, was more than he could ever discharge, even by small payments, out of the salary he was receiving, and he was very despondent. "This," Senator Crawford continues, "is where the pinch comes. The case of this young brakeman is similar to that of thousands and thousands of others in the United States today, and explains the bitter and widely extended protest heard on all sides."

Here, then, is independent testimony to the effect that

a man having a

Let us strike the balance at $800. Recall, then, Mr. Nearing's summary: "Threequarters of the adult male wageearners in America actually earn less than $600 a year." Recall further that two-thirds of the "persons engaged in gainful Occupations" in America are wageearners. It follows that one-half (threequarters of twothirds) of the total population of adult