« PreviousContinue »
tleman, a scholar, and a man capable of eloquence; and we hope he will be a bishop. If his mitred productions are as enlightened and liberal as this, we are sure he will confer as much honour on the Bench as he receives from it. There is a good deal, however, in Mr Davison's book about the virtuous marriages of the poor.' To have really the charge of a family as a hosband and a father, we are told, -to have the privilege of laying out his life in their service, is the poor man's boast, - his home is the school of his sentiments,' &c. &c. This is viewing human life through a Claude Lorraine glass, and decorating it with colours which do not belong to it. A ploughman marries a ploughwoman because she is plump; generally uses her ill; thinks his children an incumbrance; very often flogs them; and, for sentiment, has nothing more nearly approaching to it, than the ideas of broiled bacon and mashed potatoes. This is the state of the lower orders of mankind-deplorable, but true--and yet rendered much worse by the Poor-Laws.
The system of Roundsmen is much complained of; as well as that by which the labour of paupers is paid, partly by the rate, partly by the master-and a long string of Sussex Justices send up a petition on the subject. But the evil we are suffering under is an excess of population. There are ten men applying for work, when five only are wanted; of course, such a redundance of labouring persons must depress the rate of their labour far beyond what is sufficient for the support of their families. And how is that deficiency to be made up but from the parish-rates, unless it is meant suddenly and iminediately to abolish the whole system of the Poor-Laws? To state that the rate of labour is lower than a man can live by, is merely to state that we have had, and have, Poor-Laws of which this practice is at length the inevitable consequence; and nothing could be more absurd than to attempt to prevent, by acts of Parliament, the natural de. preciation of an article which exists in much greater abundance than it is wanted. Nor can any thing be more unjust than the complaint, that roundsmen are paid by their employers at an inferior rate, and that the difference is made up by the parish funds. A roundsman is commonly an inferior description of labourer who cannot get regularly hired ;-he comes upon his parish for labour commonly at those seasons when there is the least to do;-he is not a servant of the farmer's choice, and probably does not suit him ;-he goes off to any other labour at a moment's warning, when he finds it more profitable;—and the farmer is forced to keep nearly the same number of labourers, as if there were no roundsmen at all. Is it just then that a labourer, combining every species of imperfection, should receive the same
and cannot bird or fons did not
There are uts will cure we men can ally pro
wages as a chosen, regular, stationary person, who is always ready at hand, and whom the farmer has selected for his dexterity and character ?
Those persons who do not, and cannot employ labourers, have no kind of right to complain of the third or fourth part of the wages being paid by the rates; for if the farmers did not agree among themselves to take such occasional labourers, the whole of their support must be paid by the rates, instead of onethird. The order is, that the pauper shall be paid such a sum as will support himself and family; and if this agreement to take roundsmen was not entered into by the farmers, they must be paid, by the rates, the whole of the amount of the order, for doing nothing. If a circulating labourer, therefore, with three children, to whom the Justices would order 12s. per weck, receives Ss. from his employer, and 4s, from the rates, the parish is not burdened by this system to the amount of 4s., but relieved to the amount of 8s. A parish manufacture, conducted by overseers, is infinitely more burdensome to the rates, than any system of roundsmen. There are undoubtedly a few instances to the contrary. Zeal and talents will cure the original defects of any system ; but to suppose that average men can do what extraordinary men have done, is the cause of many silly projects and extravagant blunders. Mr Owen may give his whole heart and soul to the improvement of one of his parochial parallelograms; but who is to succeed to Mr Owen's enthusiasm ? Before we have quite done with the subject of roundsmen, we cannot help noticing a strange assertion of Mr Nicol, that the low rate of wages paid by the master, is an injustice to the pauper-that he is cheated, forsooth, out of 8s. or 10s. per week by this arrangement. Nothing, however, can possibly be more absurd than such an allegation. The whole country is open to him. Can he gain more any where clse? If not, this is the market price of his labour; and what right has he to complain ? or how can he say he is defrauded ? A combination among farmers to lower the price of labour, would be impossible, if labour did not exist in much greater quantities than was wanted. All such things, whether labour, or worsted stockings, or broad cloth, are, of course, always regulated by the proportion between the supply and demand. Mr Nicol cites an instance of a parish in Suffolk, where the labourer receives sixpence from the farmers, and the rest is made up by the rates; and for this he reprobates. the conduct of the farmers. But why are they not to take labour as cheap as they can get it? Why are they not to avail themselves of the market price of this, as of any other commo
dity? The rates are a separate consideration : let them supply what is wanting; but the farmer is right to get his iron, his wood, and his labour, as cheap as he can. It would, we admit, come nearly to the same thing, if 1001. were paid in wages rather than 251. in wages, and 751. by rate; but then, if the farmers were to agree to give wages above the market price, and sufficient for the support of the labourers without any rate, such an agreement could never be adhered to. The base and the crafty would make their labourers take less, and fling heavier rates upon those who adhered to the contract; whereas the agreement, founded upon giving as little as can be given, is pretty sure of being adhered to; and he who breaks it, lessens the rate to his neighbour, and does not increase it. The problem to be solved is this. If you have ten or twenty labourers who say they can get no work, and you cannot dispute this, and the Poor-Laws remain, what better scheme can be devised, than that the farmers of the parish should employ them in their turns ?
and what more absurd than to suppose that farmers so employing them should give one farthing more than the market price for their labour ?
It is contended, that the statute of Elizabeth, rightly interpreted, only compels the overseer to assist the sick and old, and not to find labour for strong and healthy men. This is true enough; and it would have been eminently useful to have at- . tended to it a century past: But to find employment for all who apply, is now, by long use, become a practical part of the PoorLaws, and will require the same care and dexterity for its abolition as any other part of that pernicious system. It would not be altogether prudent suddenly to tell a million of stout men, with spades and hoes in their hands, that the 43. of Elizabeth had been misconstrued, and that no more employment would be found for them. It requires twenty or thirty years to state such truths to such numbers.
We think, then, that the diminution of the claims of settlement, and of the authority of Justices, coupled with the other subordinate improvements we have stated, will be the best steps for beginning the abolition of the Poor Laws. When these have been taken, the description of persons entitled to relief may be narrowed by degrees. But let no man hope to get rid of these laws, even in the gentlest and wisest method, without a great deal of misery, and some risk of tumult. If Mr Bourne thinks only of avoiding risk, he will do nothing. Some risk must be incurred: But the secret is gradation: And the true reason for abolishing these laws is, not that they make the rich poor, but that they make the poor poorer,
ART. VI. Objections to Mr Brougham's Bill for Inquiring into
Abuses in Charitable Donations, with a Proposal for introducing a Sysiem into the Management of those Funds that shall prevent or detect future Abuses, and preserve the property from loss or diminution. By Francis CHARLES Parry, Esq. X. M. London, Anderson. 1819.
W e stated, in our last Number, that some of the topics there
referred to, in relation to Publick Charities, demanded a more particular consideration; and we delayed, until another opportunity, giving any account of the very excellent Letter on Grammar Schools, which appeared in the Pamphleteer. It is proper that we should now supply the omission ;-and the Tract by Mr Parry, which had not then reached us, affords an occasion of renewing the discussion, and of examining also his plans of reform. We shall begin with this examination, both because Mr Parry's publication stands at the head of the present article, and because it naturally precedes that of the Letter on Grammar Schools.
Mr Parry's Objections' were published before the Ministers had brought in the last Bill, in which they adopted almost the whole of Mr Brougham's original measure; and his purpose is chiefly to show the inefficacy of that measure, and to extenuate, for he cannot wholly defend, the rejection of it in the Session 1818. As the plan has since been sanctioned by the Legislature without a dissentient voice, we might spare ourselves the trouble of minutely considering these objections, in so far as they only touch that plan : But they lead to the proposal of Mr Parry's own views of reform; and as these are not incompatible with the subsistence of the present Commission of Inquiry, we must enter somewhat more at large into his remarks upon it.
The first and principal objection urged by Mr Parry is, that the measure is one of inquiry only; that it applies no remedy to the evils detected, and affords no preventive against their recurrence. It gives us, he says, a mere account, upon oath, of the charities in the kingdom, and leaves them as it found them; it satisfies curiosity, and nothing more; and he seriously doubts, whether, after the investigation has been completed, the subject may not lie dormant during another thirty years, as it did after the returns under Mr Gilbert's Act. He admits, however, that the measure of simple inquiry is an acceptable boon' to the country, because it may • lead to the temporary 'correction of 'some irregularities, preparatory to the expected approach of o the Commissioners.?
The next objection arises out of the former. Our author is apprehensive that the publick will grow weary of the protracteil inquiry, and that a state of apathy towards the subject of Charities will succeed the present lively interest excited by it. « Though some little good may be effected by the preparation • of a decent statement on the part of some trustees, to be sub• mitted to the Commissioners, yet there is nothing in the pro• posed measure which can, in the slightest degree, prevent the "immediate practice of any the grossest abuse as soon as the • Commissioners shall have closed their inquiry into any partiócular charity. In this point of view, the inquiry will be a o mere palliative: The paroxysm may be subdued; but the dis« order is ready to break out with redoubled virulence on the • first opportunity: There is no security for the future; and if it • shall happen that any vicious administrators of charitable funds
may, by specious statements, elude the vigilance of the Com• missioners, they will have secured indemnity for the past, and • will calculate on license for the future.'
He then speaks of the delay necessarily arising from the wide field of the Inquiry into all Charities. He reckons 50,000 as the lowest number of charitable donations that can be assigned; but he thinks they may probably amount to nearer 100,000; and he enumerates all the particulars of the proceedings which must in each case be instituted, in order to show (what indeed no man living can doubt) the impossibility of completing the Inquiry in two years, the time limited for the duration of the Act.
The last complaint of Mr Parry refers to the difficulty of having any effectual measure of reform and prevention carried into execution, while the Inquiry is pending. Indeed, he considers it to be out of the question. He argues, that to any application for such a measure, the answer would be irresistible -
Wait until the investigation is finished; because, if the plan were framed upon one Report of the Commissioners, the next Report might bring new cases to light, and render other measures necessary.?
Now, before proceeding to Mr Parry's own plan, let us examine a little the validity of these objections. That the Inquiry will extend beyond the time limited by the acts, no one can doubt. But is our author so ignorant of the subject, as to imagine that the statutory limitation was intended to be final, if the experience of two years should prove the measure to be advantageous ? Every such Inquiry, indeed almost all the most im- *'. portant amendments of our law, have been at first enacted for a short period, and adopted, as it were, experimentally. So it