PREFACE.

THE following letter was written and printed, but not published, during the sitting of the Committee of the House of Commons on the Poor Laws. It was introductory to certain propositions for making use of Friendly Societies in reforming, and perhaps eventually abrogating the system of Poor Laws; undertakings for which, as appeared to the writer, the Committee were not at that time prepared to attempt by more decisive and direct methods. Notwithstanding many practical objections, of the force of which no man is more sensible than the writer, the Committee included these suggestions, with some modification, among those which they thought fit to be reported for the consideration of the House.

One view, then, with which the letter is now published is, to illustrate those passages of the Committee's Report, [p. 12-13] which relate to Friendly Societies; but a stronger motive to the publication arises from the wish to give a more extensive circulation to the observations upon the general subject, which in a limited circle have attracted some notice.

The author is fully aware, that these observations tend to no very precise or satisfactory conclusion; but all that has been said and written, even within the last year, satisfies him that this uncertainty belongs to the subject, by whomsoever handled; and that although the particular scheme of half measures here detailed will not be found extensively practicable, it will be only upon a principle of compromise, arising out of the doubts and difficulties herein displayed, that parliament will finally deem it politic to legislate.

ATT

LETTER,

&c. &c. &c.

Beckenham, 21st April, 1817.

MY DEAR SIR,

ACCORDING to the intimation which I gave before the recess to the Committee on the Poor Laws, I proceed to submit, through you, to the consideration of its members, what has occurred to me upon that subject, and particularly the ideas, which I have already explained imperfectly, in regard to the use that may be made of Friendly or Benefit Societies.

My suggestions for forming these Institutions upon a new principle, and affording to them a parochial guaranty, being perhaps the only part of what I have to offer which is in any degree new or peculiar; it is on that point only that I have hitherto ventured to state my sentiments: but I should greatly misrepresent my own views on the larger ques ion, and very inadequately explain my ideas even on the particular branch of it to which my suggestions refer, if, in using the indulgence afforded to me by the Committee, I were to confine myself to the consideration of Friendly Societies. Reflection has confirmed me in the opinion, that a guaranty, supported by the parochial assessments, of the benefits of such Societies, may be made one of the means by which the great evil of the Poor Laws is to be checked; but I should attribute to that proposition a very disproportionate importance, if I were to state that it would of itself be an effectual or even an useful measure. It is only as accompanying and facilitating a system of administration of the Laws of Relief, very different from the present, that I can venture to recommend my proposal.

Of the measures necessary in my humble opinion, for effecting this alteration of system, most have, in principle, been recommended to the Committee by other members; some have been specifically stated: but I shall take the liberty of embodying into my scheme the valuable suggestions which we have received; believing, that even though my own peculiar part of the scheme may fail, I may usefully endeavour to give a practical and connected shape to propositions which have as yet been only generally discussed:~and I trust that the Committee will not consider me as guilty of piracy, though I should recommend, without specific acknowledgment, what has been offered by others.

Diffident as I sincerely feel, in touching, however slightly, upon general principles, I find it impossible to make myself intelligible without some explanation of those by which I am influenced.

It is perhaps admitted by all that we are now in a situation from which we cannot easily or suddenly pass to a wholesome state, and it may perhaps be thought unnecessary to describe systems or lay down principles, the application of which, if not wholly impracticable, is at least very remote. Yet I conceive that unless we are in some measure agreed as to the desired end of our deliberations, we shall hardly understand one another as to the means nor shall we duly appreciate the suggestions which we discuss, unless we explain to each other the principles upon which they are founded, and their ultimate operation, as well as their immediate effect.

Now, although I have endeavoured to preserve in my scheme a facility of adaptation hereafter to more than one view of political economy, yet I own, that it appears difficult to come to a decision either upon the suggestions which I am about to offer, or upon some of the points at this moment before the Committee, without determining how far we are affected by the opinions and conclusions of modern writers on population and subsistence.

Or, to speak perhaps more practically, it seems at least necessary, that in proceeding to reform the system of English Poor Laws, each of us should make up his own mind, whether he adopts, as many do, the act of the 43d of Elizabeth as the point of perfection, or whether he considers that Law as the foundation and commencement of a vicious system.

I fear that some gentlemen, who are averse from a discussion of the subject upon general principles, are disposed to take that act as a standard, without a sufficient consideration of the principles which it involves.

When we are desired to "tread back our steps to the 43d of Elizabeth," it is meant, no doubt, that we should destroy some material branches of the existing system-particularly, the practice of giving pecuniary relief to able-bodied men: but it is meant also, that we should retain other essential provisions, among the most

obnoxious to political economists, as containing, according to opinions very generally received, the most injurious vices of the system.

If we abide by the act of Elizabeth, in its least extensive construction, we undertake the charge of those children whose parents are not able to maintain them; and we engage to set to work as well those children (if not helpless) as all other poor persons.

Herein, we sin against two favourite doctrines of political economy; we facilitate the growth of a population not accompanied by an increase in the means of subsistence; and we create a supply of labour not proportionate to the demand, or to the funds for putting it in activity. We promote the reproduction of paupers, by enabling a man to marry before he has ensured the means of main taining a family; we encourage idleness, by allowing him to depena (for a considerable part of his expenditure) upon funds not acquired by his own industry; we subject property to an unlimited assessment :-we perpetuate, in short, if that political economy be sound, a great proportion of those evils of our system, which however they may have been extended during the last twenty years, by the enactments and practices originating in the scarcity of corn, are certainly not new within that period, and of which perhaps that very extension might be attributed to the original faultiness of the system.

Among the specific propositions, too, which have been made to the Committee, there are some which necessarily involve similar considerations; Mr. B., supported by you, Sir, proposes to carry into effect, in a new mode, the provision of the act of Elizabeth, concerning Children. It is true, that this proposition has in view, a limitation of parochial relief, by offering it to the poor man in a mode from which he is expected to be averse; but it is nevertheless true, that the proposition would ratify the establishment of a principle, tending to secure against want, families improvidently produced.

In Lord C's. view of the subject, a supply of work is one of the most prominent points; now, whatever moral advantages that mode of relief may have over the other, it equally proceeds upon the plan of providing, at all events, for all the people that may be born, and is scarcely less operative in encouraging their production.

Others of our members, Mr. W. S., for instance, and Colonel W., would give relief in food rather than in money; this recommendation has obvious advantages, but it is peculiarly open to the charge of undertaking to do that which the dispensation of Providence may have rendered impossible.

I conceive, then, not only that these several suggestions, considered as parts of a scheme of Reform, must be weighed with res ference to general principles, but that their character as palliatives of an insurmountable evil, must be estimated by the same standard:

for upon all of them it is charged, not only that they are incon sistent with a scheme of theoretical perfection, or with the system which we would establish if our choice were now free, but that they retain within them the seeds of the evils of which they are intended to check the growth.

The suggestions indeed of Mr. H. appear to be of a different description; in proposing to restrain the power of Magistrates, he intends I presume (for otherwise the proposition would be nugatory) to exclude from the grant of relief persons who according to modern practice and to the view of the Poor Laws generally entertained, are accustomed to receive it. Mr. H.'s idea is one of those which I shall endeavour to carry into effect; but it is surely impossible to justify, otherwise than by condemning the general principle of the Poor Laws, as commenced by Queen Elizabeth, a measure which shall deprive the pauper of any other security for parochial assistance, than the will, or the judgment, of those at whose expense it is afforded.

*

3

I fear, then, that we cannot hope to palliate existing evils, or remedy particular abuses, without reference to the theory of the system from which they spring. If our palliatives leave the prin ciple in operation, they will be effectual but for a moment: it would surely be impolitic, perhaps unjust, to abandon that principle, unless we either provide other means from which the poor may derive an equivalent benefit, or, satisfy ourselves that the principle itself is impracticable, and that the attempt to secure an un limited population against want, is vain and presumptuous,

A specific proposition indeed to this effect is likely to be brought before us.

Such being the state of our deliberations, I shall venture to connect with my suggestions for the amendment of our system, my view of the principles upon which our systematic relief of indigence may fairly and safely be governed.

{

It will, I presume, be acknowledged that the wholesome state of society would be that, in which, however numerous and distant the gradations of condition might be, it should be in the power of every man, by the exertion of honest industry, independent of public relief, or even private charity, to provide sustenance for himself and his family, in infancy, sickness, and old age, as well as in health and manhood.

However it may be, in a society which we may form in imagination, I believe that it will be generally admitted that the accomplishment of this state of things is in England nearly hopeless. One of our Members indeed (Mr. C.) did I think give it as his opinion that a man might from the earnings of early labour provide for a future family, but I believe Mr. B.'s to be the general and the correct opinion, that wages cannot possibly be so arranged, as