Life, 1915-06-17 · page 14 of 52
Life — June 17, 1915 — page 14: what you’re looking at
What you’re looking at
This page contains three distinct satirical pieces: **"Protection"** (top left): A sketch showing two figures labeled Mercy and Justice discussing hiding in mountains. The dialogue suggests they've abandoned their protective roles in society, implying that justice and mercy have become obsolete or compromised in contemporary affairs. **"Those Two-Sided Questions"** (right column): An editorial criticizing how public debates become unproductive when arguments have two equally valid sides. The example given—whether natural resource conservation is good—shows how "avenues of publicity" allow either side to "knock the other over the ropes," making resolution impossible. **"Preliminary"** and **"The Back Numbers"** (bottom): Brief satirical pieces about organizational structure and social commentary, listing items like "Pragmatism," "Fletcherism," and "The Trusts" as response categories. The overall tone critiques institutional failure and rhetorical deadlock in contemporary society.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
1086 Protection ERCY, Justice and Truth met in a secret pass in the mountains. “Where shall we hide ourselves?” said Mercy. “I thought that I was getting friendly with the sons of men. I went about fearlessly and my good deeds were ap- plauded. But now all is changed, I am now an outcast. Where shall we hide?” At this Justice and Truth both laughed. “Don't be uneasy,” they both declared. “We have been used to concealing ourselves so long that all you have to do is to stick by us and you will be perfectly safe.” ‘LUPE: Those Two-Sided Questions 'HE trouble with so many of our questions is that they have two sides. If it weren't for this awkward fact we could make short work of many of the questions that perplex us. But, alas, just as soon as a two-sided question appears on the scene an argument starts and the question gets lost in the urgument. It would be an easy matter, for instance, to decide that conservation of natural resources is a good thing. No argument there at all. But the question immediately comes up as to whether or not a captain of industry is a natural resource and as such entitled to be conserved. Upon this point the captains would quite properly insist that they be heard. What then? As they control all the so-called avenues of publicity, one side of the argument would be very apt to knock the other over the ropes, and we should quickly arrive at a point in the rear of where we started. In a land which is so prolific of two-sided questions, only a straddler can be perfectly happy. "Gee? morning,” chuckled Ananias. “What are you in for?” The clerical shade groaned: funeral sermon.” “A multimillionaire’s THE WAY IT SEEMS AT LEAVING TIME Preliminary HE Back Numbers met. Said the first trust: “I suppose we ought to have some sort of an organization, We are more or less permanent.” “That's a good idea,” said the second trust. “The first thing in order is to call the roll.” The following responded “ present”: My Policies Pragmatism. The Big Stick. Fletcherism. High Corsets, High Tariffs, Daniels. The Trusts, DOES LIGHTNING NEVER STRIKE TWICE IN THE SAME PLACE? comicbooks.com