mal-administration. In fact, great fums are levied beyond what the poor receive: it requires briguing to be named a church-warden: the nomination, in London efpecially, gives him credit at once; and however meagre at the commencement of his office, he is round and plump before it ends. To wax fat and rich by robbing the poor! Let us turn our eyes from a scene fo horrid *.

Inequality in taxing, and embezzlement of the money levied, which are notorious, poifon the minds of the people; and imprefs them with a notion, that all taxes raifed by public authority are ill-managed.

These evils are great, and yet are but flight compared with what follow. As the number of poor in England, as well as the expence of maintenance, are increafing daily; proprietors of land, in order to be relieved of a burden fo grievous, drive the poor out of the parish, and prevent all perfons from fettling in it who are likely to become a burden: cottages are demolished, and marriage obftructed, Influenced by the prefent evil, they look not forward to depopulation, nor to the downfall of hufbandry and manufactures by fcarcity of hands. Every parish is in a state of war with every other parifh, concerning pauper fettlements and removals.

The price of labour is generally the fame in the different fhires of Scotland, and in the diffe

rent

* In the parish of St. George Hanover-Square, a great reform was made fome years ago. Inhabitants of figure, not excepting men of the highest rank, take it in turn to be church-wardens; which has reduced the poor-rates in that parish to a trifle. But people, after acquiring a name, foon tire of drudging for others. The drudgery will be left to low people as formerly, and the tax will again rife as high in that parish as in others. The poor-rates, in Dr. Davenant's time, were about L. 700,000 year. ly. In the year 1764, they amounted to L. 2,200,000. 'In the year 1773, they amounted to L. 3,000,000, equal to fix fhillings in the pound land-tax,

rent parishes. A few exceptions are occafioned by the neighbourhood of a great town, or by fome extenfive manufacture that requires many hands. In Scotland the price of labour refembles water, which always levels itself if high in any one corner, an influx of hands brings it down. The price of labour varies in every parifh of England: a labourer who has gained a fettlement in a parish, on which he depends for bread when he inclines to be idle, dares not remove to another parifh where wages are higher, fearing to be cut out of a fettlement altogether. England is in the fame condition with refpect to labour, that France lately was with refpect to corn; which however, plentiful in one province, could not be exported to fupply the wants of another. The pernicious effects of the latter with respect to food, are not more obvious, than of the former with refpect to manufac

tures.

་།

In

English manufactures labour under a ftill greater hardship than inequality of wages. In a country where there is no fund for the poor but what nature provides, the labourer must be fatisfied with fuch wages as are cuftomary he has no refource; for pity is not moved by idleness. England, the labourers command the market: if not fatisfied with customary wages, they have a tempting refource; which is, to abandon work altogether, and put themselves on the parish. Labour is much cheaper in France than in England: feveral plaufible reafons have been affigned; but in my judgement the difference arifes from the poor-laws. In England every man is entitled to be idle; becaufe every idler is entitled to a maintenance. In France, the funds allotted for the poor, yield the fame fum annually: that fum is always pre-occupied ; and France, with refpect to

all

all but those on the lift, is a nation that has no fund provided by law for the poor.

Depopulation, inequality in the price of labour, and extravagant wages are deplorable evils. But the English poor-laws are productive of evils ftill more deplorable: they are fubverfive both of morality and industry. This is a heavy charge, but no less true than heavy. Fear of want is the only effectual motive to induftry with the labouring poor: remove that fear, and they ceafe to be induftrious. The ruling paffion of thofe who live by bodily labour, is to fave a pittance for their children, and for fupporting themselves in old age: ftimulated by defire of accomplishing thefe ends, they are frugal and industrious; and the profpect of fuccefs is to them a continual feaft. Now, what worse can malice invent against such a man, under colour of friendship, than to fecure bread to him and his children whenever he takes a diflike to work; which effectually deadens his fole ambition, and with it his honest induftry? Relying on the certainty of a provifion againft want, he relaxes gradually till he finks into idlenefs: idleness leads to profligacy profligacy begets difeafes and the wretch becomes an object of public charity before he has run half his courfe. Such are the genuine effects of the English tax for the poor, under a mistaken notion of charity. There never known in any country, a fcheme for the poor more contradictory to found policy. Might it not have been foreseen, that to a groveling creature, who has no fenfe of honour and fcarce any of fhame, the certainty of maintenance would prove an irresistible temptation to idlenefs and debauchery: The poor-houfe at Lyons contained originally but forty beds, of which twenty only were occupied. The eight hundred beds it contains at prefent, are not fufficient for thofe who demand

2

was

demand admittance. A premium is not more fuccessful in any cafe, than where given to promote idlenefs *. A houfe for the poor was erected in a French village, the revenue of which by economy became confiderable. Upon a reprefentation by the curate of the parish: that more beds were neceffary, the proprietor undertook the management. He fold the house, with the furniture; and to every proper object of charity, he ordered a moderate proportion of bread and beef. The poor and fick were more comfortably lodged at home, than formerly in the poor-houfe. And by that management, the parish-poor decreafed, inftead of increafing as at Lyons. How few Englifh manufacturers labour the whole week, if the work of four or five days afford them maintenance? Is not this a demonstration, that the malady of idleness is widely fpread? In Bristol, the parish-poor twenty years ago did not exceed four thousand at prefent, they amount to more than ten thousand. But as a malady when left to itfelf, commonly effectuates its own cure; fo it will be in this cafe: when, by prevailing idlenefs, every

one

* A London alderman named Harper, who was cotemporary with James I. or his fon Charles, bequeathed ten or twelve acres of meadow ground in the parish of Sr. Andrew's Holborn, London, for the benefit of the poor in the town of Bedford. This ground has been long covered with houses, which yield L. 40co to L. 5000 yearly. That fum is laid out upon charity-schools, upon defraying the expence of apprenticeships, and upon a stock to young perfons when they marry; an encouragement that attracts to the town of Bedford great numbers of the lower claffes. So far well: but mark the confequence. That encouragement relaxes the industry of many, and adds greatly to the number of the poor. Hence it is, that in few places of England does the poor's rate amount so high as in the town of Bedford. An extensive common in the parish of Charley, Suffex, is the chief cause of an extravagant assessment for the poor, no less than nine fhillings in the pound of rack rent. Give a poor man accefs to a common for feeding two or three cows, you make him idle by a dependence upon what he does not labour for. The town of Largo in Fife has a small hofpital, erected many years ago by a gentleman of the name of Wood; and confined by him to the poor of his own name. That name being rare in the neighbourhood, accefs to the hofpital is easy. One man in particular is entertained there, whose father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, enjoyed fucceffively the fame benefit; every one of whom probably would have been useful members of fociety, but for that temptation to idleness.

one without shame claims parifh-charity, the burden will become intolerable, and the poor will be left to their fhifts.

The immoral effects of public charity are not confined to those who depend on it, but extend to their children. The conftant anxiety of a labouring man to provide for his iffue, endears them to him. Being relieved of that anxiety by the tax for the poor, his affection cools gradually, and he turns at last indifferent about them. Their independence, on the other hand, weans them from their duty to him. And thus, affection between parent and child, which is the corner-ftone of fociety, is in a great measure obliterated among the labouring poor. In a plan published by the Earl of Hillsborough, an article is propofed to oblige parents to maintain their indigent children, and children to maintain their indigent parents. Natural affection must be at a low ebb, where fuch a regulation is neceffary: but it is neceffary, at leaft in London, where it is common to fee men in good business neglecting their aged and difeafed parents, for no better reason than that the parifh is bound to find them bread: Prob tempora, prob mores!

In

The immoral effects of public charity spread still wider. It fails not to extinguifh the virtue of charity among the rich; who never think of giving charity, when the public undertakes for all. a fcheme publifhed by Mr. Hay, one article is, to raise a stock for the poor by voluntary contributions, and to make up the deficiency by a parish-tax. Will individuals ever contribute, when it is not to relieve the poor, but to relieve the parish? Every hofpital has a poor-box, which feldom produces any thing*. The great comfort

of

* One exception I am fond to mention. The poor-box of the Edinburgh infirmary was neglected two or three years, little being expected from it. When opened, L. 74 and a fraction was found in it; contributed probably by the lower fort, who were ashamed to give their mite publicly.