THE IDLE RICH.
[TO TITE EDITOR 07 THE " SPECTATOR:1
Six,—Your thoughtful criticism of Mr. Gladstone's con- demnation of the idle rich seems to have missed one point which is perhaps worth noting.
Granted that from our point of view—i.e., the point of view of men who cannot be idle—the leisured man of wealth is useful as showing certain happy possibilities of life ; yet still we must try to put ourselves into his position, and then see whether his life is capable of justification. Of course, if he is a patron of art and literature, a centre of civilisation in his country home, a man of culture, it is absurd to call him "idle." He is no more idle than is Lord Tennyson or Sir F. Leighton. But let one cast one's eyes at that large section of society which enjoys wealth and despises anything but amuse- ment; for which cricket and tennis, and dinners, and dancing and theatre-going (I purposely exclude vicious occupations), are the true ends of living. What then ? These people have consciences, and brains, and plenty of chances of usefully employing themselves. They do not do so. Can they honestly look back at years past and feel any self-respect P But a life which is inconsistent with self-respect is self-condemned.—I
Previous page
