I don’t worry, neither do I regret. Why should I regret? If I have done something which resulted in painful experience, by avoiding repetition I make amends. As regretting takes the time which should go to make amends, therefore regretting injures instead of helps. So, if you really regret, you will not regret, but make amends; but if you keep on regretting you really don’t regret.

WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT?

A setting hen on a quota of duck eggs, by diligent application to her business, will hatch out ducklings. She’ll produce you goslings on a capital of goose eggs. It’s what’s inside of the shell that will count in the long run. There’s some comfort in knowing what to expect under given conditions, and by understanding the egg law you upholster yourself against the hard blows of surprises.

As you sow so shall you reap. Why should you be surprised that we have all about us an element that is growing stronger, fiercer, louder--which threatens to upset all we hold dear to civilization?

You do not understand how it befalls that in a country like ours, so bountifully freighted by nature with all that makes for human well-being, there should be discontent rampant. While our workmen have each a full dinner-pail, what warrant have they to take up with such fads as anarchism, socialism, single-taxery, trade-unionism, and the like? How comes it that these ignorant people should allow themselves to be swayed by heresies that threaten to undermine the peace of society? Well may we tremble for the future!

The “divine right of property” is being impugned; the expediency of land-ownership is being challenged; our homes are in danger; the family, the very root of social cohesion, is threatened; and even the holy kitchen stove is in danger! Not an institution exists whose raison d’être is not under scrutiny.

The wisdom of God--nay, the very existence of deity--is questioned, and bold inquiry challenges creation. Everywhere society is conscious of peril. You see these things and you marvel. Your face has a look on it like one standing outside of the grocery store trying to recall what it is that he has forgotten.

How could it be otherwise?

What could Laban expect in mutton futures in view of the transaction he made with Jacob, his prospective son-in-law, in the first and second degrees?

You remember the story, how the wily old sheep-raiser palmed off Leah on the young fellow when it was Rachel he was after; and how he had to put in seven more strenuous years to pay for Rachel.

In this old Bible story of Jacob and his dealing with Laban is a moral, embodying a lesson for society.

Jacob’s revach (or rake-off, in modern vernacular) after Laban had unloaded the ladies upon him, was to consist of all the spotted and speckled lambs. Rake-off was ever the mother of ingenuity, and Jacob promptly discovered a process to induce sheep to beget spotted offspring. He tried a game of psychologic suggestion on the mother sheep during bearing time. He set up lines of twigs with the bark peeled off in spots, which gave the sheep mothers a speckled point of view, resulting in a larger than ordinary percentage of off-color lambs.

This may look like a “dirty Jew trick,” which none of our best people would countenance, and the discovery of such chicanery by any member of the board of trade would probably subject him to prompt expulsion, and serve him well right, of course, but what could Laban expect?

There is an irrefragable law back of Jacob’s formula.

Whatever ideals you place before sheep of any country will secure their respect and adherence. Your mudsill may not achieve all that your hero has attained, but he will approach as nearly to the ideal as his power will admit of his doing. You do not want our lowlier classes to be anarchists and communists and insurgents, yet you point to the anarchists and communists and insurgents of other days with fond pride and unmistakable admiration.

We must remodel our Pantheon. There are too many speckled twigs in the gallery of fame. Let us set Carrie Nation and her redoubtable hatchet to work demolishing statues of the disturbers of the peace of the world, that our own peace be no longer endangered.

Can we afford to parade our national heroes as examples to our working-classes? Do we not already see the insurgency that such ideals as Washington has instilled in the breast of our humble classes? George Washington is our great national hero. But suppose we were to rehearse his history in brief, omitting his name and the glamour that we associate with it, what would we think of such a man to-day?

Given a commission in his Britannic Majesty’s Colonial Army, he defaulted allegiance to his king over so sordid a matter as a trifle of stamp duties. He became commander-in-chief of an army that was in rebellion against the crown under which he had been exalted. His triumph consisted in disobedience to law, and he became the father of his country, much revered by school-children on February 22d, when that date does not fall on a Sunday, and on July 4th, when it does not rain. With such ideals, there is no wonder that some Americans follow his example.

If Lord Cornwallis had been held up for admiration, to-day the results would have been far different. He was a patriot and a hero. He was a man who served his king; he was a true pillar of law and order.

The life of Washington was one of disobedience and treason to his king. The very act of gathering his army was treason. His triumph was by breaking the law. With Washington as Ideal--what can you expect?

Come down to John Brown, the hero of Harper’s Ferry. For the past forty years he has been held up before the people for admiration, as a martyr, a lover of justice, and a friend of man. What did John Brown do? He deliberately began to form an army and release the negroes, who were the private property of many of the nation’s best citizens. Defying the power of the state and the nation’s laws, he entrenched himself in a little building at Harper’s Ferry. Surrounded by a few staunch friends and the negroes who had followed his lead, they attempted to fight, and succeeded in killing a few respectable law-abiding citizens. Finally, he was hanged by the neck, the authorities punishing him like a common criminal. That same John Brown is celebrated in song and in story. Children are taught to know of him and to love him; and yet, he was a man who defied law and order.

If such people are held up before the eyes of admiring youth, do not think these lads will be satisfied with things as they are. If you honor rebels and law-breakers, what can you expect?

Oliver Cromwell, “Old Ironsides,” as he was called, was a hero. At least the Protestant part of Great Britain thinks so to this day. Oliver Cromwell hated kings and rulers as they then held sway, and was the direct cause of one king at least being murdered. Cromwell had very little regard, or none at all, for the laws of his country. When the British Parliament did not suit him he drove it out of doors. He went about agitating the people against the existing powers of the land. This ended in many bloody battles against the rulers. He managed to die in bed, but the good people came to their own after his death. His ashes were dug up and scattered to the winds. In the land where we find Oliver Cromwell held up as an ideal, we revolt at the idea of its youth taking him as a model. Had the respectable English been held up for admiration, or had their representatives been thus honored, the result would have been far different. But with Cromwell as the guiding-star, what can you expect?

Or revert to the illustrious figures of long gone.

Take Moses, for instance, the great ideal of the Jews. Place him under the intellectual microscope. Moses did not have a spark of refinement. He was an ingrate of the worst kind, and a trickster. He had even committed murder. Just consider his true history. A foundling who had been left in a place where fashionable people were accustomed to bathe, was discovered by the beautiful and accomplished daughter of the noble King Pharaoh as she was going for a swim, and saw the child lying in the bullrushes playing with his toes. Instead of calling a policeman and having the baby taken to an orphan asylum, she bade her maid-in-waiting to bring it to her. Taking it to her own bosom, she bore it to the royal palace, and called the royal help to assist her in bringing him up. Thus she gave Moses every advantage which a home at court could provide. He throve well and grew strong under this excellent care. This lad sat at the king’s table, slept in a bed provided by the king, and his clothes were selected from the royal wardrobe. He was sent to the king’s school, and doubtless played foot-ball in the king’s team. One would think that Moses would have been grateful for all this kindness, and that nothing would be too hard a task for him to do in the service of the king and his daughter.

Suppose you take the story of Moses, omitting the names of the parties, and then submit it with this question to our wise men: “If a man had been treated thus, what ought he to do?” Give us your opinion as to the answer you suppose you would receive.