<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0040" id="link2H_4_0040"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> DOWN AMONG THE DEAD MEN. * </h2>
<p>* July 2, 1893.<br/></p>
<p>The ramming and sinking of the "Victoria" is the great event of the day.
It is said to show the uselessness of big ironclads in naval warfare. But
as the "Camperdown," which sent the "Victoria" to the bottom in a few
minutes, has herself sustained very little damage, it looks as though
"rams" were anything but inefficient. There has never yet been an
engagement between two fleets of ironclads, and no one knows how they
would behave in an actual battle. Our own impression is that both fleets
would go to the bottom, and this opinion is shared by a good many
practical persons at Portsmouth and Devonport. However that may be, it is
a great pity that "civilised" nations are still so uncivilised as to spend
their time and money on these costly engines of destruction. We are well
aware that the newspapers go into hysterics over our soldiers and sailors,
and no doubt many of them are very gallant fellows. But in this, we
venture to think, they do not represent the masses of the people. Never
have we witnessed such deep and sincere enthusiasm as was displayed by the
crowd of spectators at the Agricultural Hall, while the American,
Portuguese, and English firemen were going through their evolutions. The
business of these fine fellows was to <i>save</i> life. They incurred the
deadliest danger for human preservation, and not for human destruction.
And how the people cheered them as they rode upon their engines, drawn by
galloping horses! With what breathless interest they watched them climbing
up ladders, sliding down ropes, and bearing men on their backs out of
third-floor windows! It did one good to watch the proceedings, which
showed that a new spirit was taking possession of the people, that they
were beginning to be more interested in the savers than in the slayers of
men.</p>
<p>But all this is a digression. Let us return to the "Victoria." She is now
in eighty fathoms of water with her hundreds of dead. Poor fellows! theirs
was a sad fate; though not more so than the fate of miners blasted or
suffocated in explosive pits. We pity their dear ones—mothers,
sisters, wives, and children. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of hearts are
aching on their account; mourning for the dead who will never be buried
under the sweet churchyard grass, though they have the whole ocean for
their tomb and the stars for its nightlamps.</p>
<p>On Sunday, of course, the sky-pilots, all over England, were busy at
"improving the occasion." They always make profit out of death and
disaster. "Prepare to meet thy God!" was the lesson which most of them
derived from this catastrophe. Of course the preachers are ready <i>themselves</i>.
Who can doubt it? But they are in no hurry to have it tested. They do not
want to meet their God until they are obliged to. It is so much better to
be a commercial traveller in God's service than to take a situation in the
house.</p>
<p>Some of the preachers dared to talk about "Providence"—the sweet
little cherub that sits up aloft, to keep watch o'er the life of poor
Jack, and lets him go to the bottom or furnish a dinner for sharks. Surely
that Providence is a rare old fraud. A cripple, a paralytic, a sleeper, a
dead man, could have done as much for the "Victoria" as Providence managed
to do. "Oh!" it is said, "but the drowned sailors are gone to Heaven;
Providence looked after them in that way." Indeed! Then why do you lament
over them? Still more, why do you congratulate the survivors? According to
your theory, they have missed a slice of good luck.</p>
<p>We have frequently remarked, and we now repeat, that religion is based
upon the bed-rock of <i>selfishness</i>; and nothing proves the truth of
this so clearly, and so convincingly, as the talk that people indulge in
about Providence. For instance, take this telegram, which is printed in
the newspapers as having been sent home to a gentleman in England:—"Jack
saved. Awful affair. Thank God!" This telegram was written hastily, but it
was sincere; the writer had no time to drop into hypocrisy. "Jack saved"
was his first thought; that is, Jack is still on earth and out of heaven.
"Awful affair" was his second thought; that is, a lot of other poor devils
are gone to heaven—anyhow, they are no longer on earth. "Thank God"
was his third thought; that is, Jack's all right. Thus it was two for our
Jack, and one for all the hundreds who perished! It may be pointed out,
too, that "Thank God!" comes in the wrong place; where it stands it seems
to thank God for the calamity. Yes, so it does, if we look at the mere
composition; but the order of the ejaculations is all right, if we look at
the sentiment, the pious sentiment, of the person who wrote the telegram.
He followed the logic of his personal feelings, like everyone else who
"thanks God" and talks of Providence.</p>
<p>Season and personal feeling often do not coincide. In this case, for
instance, it requires a very slight exercise of the intellect to see that,
if Providence saved "Jack," Providence drowned the rest. "No," some will
reply, "Providence did not drown them, but only let them drown." Well,
that is exactly the same thing. Superficially, it is the same thing; for
Providence, like men, is responsible for omissions as well as commissions.
If you let a blind man walk over a precipice without warning him, you are
his murderer, you are guilty of his blood. Resolving not to do a thing is
as much an act of will as resolving to do it. "Thou shalt" is a law as
imperative as "Thou shalt not," though it does not figure in the
decalogue. Profoundly also, as well as superficially, Providence, if it
saved Jack, killed those who perished; for, as Jack was not visibly fished
out of the water by Providence, it can only be held that Providence saved
him on the ground that Providence <i>does everything</i>, which covers the
whole of our contention. "I the Lord do all these things." So says the
Bible, and so you must believe, if you have a God at all.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />