increase of prudence. May it not be asked, is such likely to be begotten while our so-called Charitable Institutions, as also the Poor Law, conspire to teach the working classes that there is no need to make provision for the contingencies of life?
The Poor Law, in place of attempting to save our working classes from pauperism, insists on their being in that disgraceful condition ere it will undertake to help them. Mr. Glen, in his notes on the consolidated orders of the Poor Law Commissioners, says, p. 29, The function of the Guardians is to relieve destitution actually existing, and not to spend the money of the ratepayers in preventing a person from becoming destitute.
Again, listen to another of our many mischievous aphorisms. Charity, it is said, cannot be done by deputy. By charity, be it observed, almsgiving is intended. So far is such from being the case that, the writer feels confident the experience of all those who have practical knowledge of the subject would afford abundant proof that, DIRECT ALMSGIVING is, to the recipients and ultimately to the community, nothing short of a curse.
The writer has known of a poor person who, when remonstrated with on the absence of industrial habits, turned on the remonstrant and urged, in excuse, that until emasculated for labour, by UNSOLICITED AID, she had neither sought for nor desired assistance from any one. Subsequent inquiry corroborated the woman's assertion. Doubtlessly there are thousands of similar cases. The receiver of stolen property is viewed as equally criminal with the thief. In like manner, he who
