Baltimore Evening Sun (3 July 1911): 6.

He (the Hon. Ollie James) is in no sense a rabble-rouser, nor has he ever played the role of demagogue.—The Fulton (Ky.) Leader.

As for Ollie, let him go hang—but isn’t “rabble-rouser” worth taking into the vocabulary?

Much talk goes ’round regarding the insult lurking in Mayor Preston’s demand that the new School Commissioners pledge themselves in advance, and sight unseen, to vote for Mr. Van Sickle’s dismissal. And yet my trusty spies bring me news that the Mayor is fairly swamped with direct and indirect applications for the two remaining jobs, and that many of these applications are coming from “well-known business men,” “prominent Baltimoreans” and other such self-confessed custodians of all the wisdom and honor in our town and all the virtue.

The champion Ibsen actor of the world died the other day in Denmark. He was Emil Poulsen, for many years a prominent figure at the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen. During his days of active work he appeared in Ibsen plays no less than 295 times and enacted 13 different roles, ranging from that of Bishop Nikolas, in “The Pretenders,” to that of John Gabriel Borkman, in the last play, but one, that Ibsen ever wrote. Poulson created the role of Torvald Helmer, in “A Doll’s House,” when that revolutionary and immortal drama had its first production on any stage, at Copenhagen, on December 21, 1879. Fru Betty Hennings, who created the part of Nora, is still alive, though she has retired, I believe, from the stage. Poulson was also the first Danish impersonator of Dr. Stockmann in “An Enemy to the People,” Hjalmar Ekdal in “The Wild Duck,” Dr. Wangel in “The Lady from ths Sea,” Halvard Solness in “The Master Builder,” Alfred Allmers in “Little Eyolf” and Borkman in “John Gabriel Borkman,” though all of these roles had been done before he essayed them, chiefly by Norwegian actors.

Poulsen was born in 1842 and so lived to be 69. His active career on the boards covered a period of nearly 50 years, and during that time he played 249 parts in almost as many plays. A skillful, intelligent, resourceful, protean actor of the excellent Continental school. A man whose life-work appreciably augmented the dignity of his calling.

An inch of space for the plaint of one who believes, with the anarchists, that the world might be better:

Why can’t something be done in Baltimore to put down the huckster nuisance? My wife tells me that she is called to the front door 20 times a day by Arabs, peddlers and solicitors of all sorts. Why should housekeepers be forced to answer the summonses of such useless pests? The city council ought to pass an ordinance making it unlawful for hucksters to ring door-bells.

Unluckily enough, this complainant overlooks a right which every huckster, as one of the Common People, indubitably possesses, and which no city ordinance or police fiat can ever take away from him. I allude to his sacred right to make a nuisance of himself—a right which every American citizen cherishes as the one unmistakable symbol of his superiority to all loathsome foreigners.

Sample of the actual remarks of a “prominent citizen” besought for a pronunciamento upon the school situation:

Don’t talk to me about no Van Sickle. The scholars in the schools today don’t learn half what they used in learn. When I went to school things were different. Today they waste their time on knittin’, mudpies an’ such damn monkey-business. I heerd the other day that they don’t learn the children spelling at all no more. I’m in favor of cuttin’ out all that fancy stuff an’ givin’ ’em somethin’ that’ll stick to the ribs. Have a cigar? Say something good an’ strong. Tell ’em I’m against it.

As the interview appears in the paper next day, done into English by the reporter:

No one can deny that the present imbroglio is disorganizing the schools and diminishing the efficiency of the teachers. Reports I have received from parents convince me that the experiments attempted by Mr. Van Sickle have failed to improve the system or to benefit the pupils. Whatever the demerits of the old curriculum, it at least laid a firm foundation and gave the pupil a working knowledge of the fundamental branches. The new curriculum does not accomplish this. I believe a change in the office of Superintendent would be to the advantage of the schools.

Let us now contemplate certain gloomy figures, in the hope that they will show us one reason why Baltimore is not going ahead as fast as some of her rivals.

In 1900 the city of Baltimore had a population of 508,957, and was sixth among American cities; by 1910 her population had grown to 558,485, but her numerical rank had dropped to seventh, for the city of Cleveland, rising in population during the 10 years from 381,768 to 560,663, now topped her by 2,178. The average population of Baltimore, from 1900 to 1910, was 533,721; the average population of Cleveland was 421,215. The death rate in Baltimore was 18.3; the death rate in Cleveland was 14.2. An average of 9,767 Baltimoreans died during each of the 10 years, or 97,670 in all; an average of 5,981 Clevelanders died during each of the 10 years, or 59,812 in all.

Now, if the death rate prevailing in Baltimore had also prevailed in Cleveland the total deaths in Cleveland would have been, not 59,812, but 77,082, and the population of the town, in 1910, would have been, not 560,663, but 543,393, leaving Baltimore 15,092 ahead. And if the death rate prevailing in Cleveland had also prevailed in Baltimore, the total deaths in Baltimore would have been, not 97,670, but 75,788, and the population of Baltimore, in 1910, would have been, not 558,485, but 580,367, leaving Cleveland 19,704 behind. In either case Bahlmore would have kept her old place as sixth city of the United States.

Thus we see, brethren, that even death rates, dreary as they may seem, have an interest above and beyond the purely academic one. Thus we see, going further, how typhoid, tuberculosis and other such nasty things may deal us blows which leave marks, not only at Loudon Park, but also on the census returns, and even on the clearing house returns. Let the boomers study these figures. In their effort to drag new Baltimoreans into Baltimore they strain every sinew. Would it not also profit us if some equally strenuous effort were being made to keep alive the Baltimoreans who are already here?

H. L. Mencken