The Press.
London, England, 1854-04-01 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

House. It is not many weeks since we had occasion
to comment on a letter signed by three superior
officers of the three regiments of Foot Guards, in
which they protested against public benevolence
being extended to the wives of those soldiers who
had married without leave, on the ground that such
assistance would encourage marriage amongst the

military. That protest we thought uncalled for, and
the reason unsound, because the marriages had
taken place, not only without encouragement, but in
spite of prohibitions. But the three gallant colonels
are right in their principle, although they were
wrong in that particular application of it. Marriages
amongst soldiers should not be encouraged. But
Colonel HARCOURT, although he merely threw out
suggestions for consideration, and did not propose
any definite matured plan, seemed to consider it
advisable to place the claims of these women to
relief on a permanent basis. The Hon. and Gallant
Member
" thought that the wives of those who were, by the ab-
sence of their husbands, in a state of practical widowhood,
should be entitled to poor•law relief out of the workhouse
during that absence."

Now, would not this be a direct encouragement, even
to prudent soldiers, to contract marriage? It is
difficult to see how they accomplish it, but, at all
events, soldiers do manage to maintain their wives
whilst they are on home service ; and therefore, if
Colonel HARCOURT'S suggestion were adopted, there
would be no restraint whatsoever on these marriages,
which certainly ought, by all legitimate means, to be
discouraged. Colonel HAncouar, seeing that he
could not limit the operation of a permanent plan to
the troops in the East, asked whys distinction should
be made between them and other regiments on
foreign service ? But the gallant officer should
remember that Indian, Colonial, and Mediterranean
service comes in the ordinary routine of duty;
whereas, after the long peace, a soldier might well
be pardoned if, when considering the expediency of
marriage, he omitted European war from his list of
contingencies. More particularly does this apply to
the Guards, who, with two trivial exceptions, have
never been on foreign service since 1815 till now.
Therefore, while we do not see any objection to the
relief by voluntary contributions of the wives of sol-
diers whose marriages have been contracted before
the war broke out, and who are left destitute because
their husbands are going on special foreign service
out of the ordinary routine of duty, we see very great
objections to any general and permanent system, which
would encourage thousands of women to enter into
a state, first of marriage, then of " practical widow-
hood" during many years of life, and which would
entail on husband and wife the unhappiness gene
rally incidental to separation.

BURIALS AND THE POOR.

Tits Bishop of LONDON has done good service by
drawing attention to a practical grievance which at
present presses heavily on the poor. In the act
prohibiting interments in the burying-grounds of
London, which was passed in haste during the
cholera panic, no provision was made for that
numerous class which, though on the verge of
pauperism, are yet too proud to accept parochial
relief. Apart from all other considerations, death is
to the very poor a terrible aggravation of the
miseries of poverty. A few pounds are to the
Spitalfields weaver, or to the white-wood worker, a
loss which he may never retrieve. And even before
the new act a funeral necessarily cost several pounds.
But this expense that act has greatly increased.
Owing to the vast area over which this overgrown
metropolis extends, and interments within these limits
being prohibited, burials must now take place miles
away from the scene of death,—at Kensal-green,
Highgate, Norwood, or other cemeteries. On Sun
day, the day when the funerals of the poor are most
numerous, long lines of hearses crowd the roads
leading to these resting-places of mortality. But
the poor have not always the funds necessary to
enable them to comply with the requisitions of the
law ; the consequence is that in many cases the
corpse is kept unburied until the tainted atmosphere
is unfit for the living to inhale, and there is too
much reason to believe it is at last flung, like that of
a dog, into the nearest ditch or pool. No less than
three dead bodies were lately found in a pond
adjoining the Eastern Counties Railway, and there is
little doubt that these were deprived of Christian
burial by the cause we have stated. Some remedy
SOLDIERS' WIVES• can surely be found for this ; some relaxation in the
atringency of the law might surely be permitted
ON Thursday Colonel Thiscorsr, in moving for
until cemeteries suited to the poor have been pro-
returns of the number of wives left behind by the sided. Or, if that is thought inexpedient, we would
soldiers now on their way to the seat of war, brought suggest for. consideration whether the metropolit
cent
the subject of their position generally before the parishes might not be compelled to provide ade

291

funeral on the application of persons who will
deposit a sum of money equal to that which burials
coat before the new act passed. If some remedy
is not applied, the act designed to protect the
public health may engender pestilence, and create
practices which are not only brutalising to the poor,
but disgraceful to the nation.

UNIVERSITY REFORM DEVELOPED.
TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS."
Sir,—The interest excited by the proposed mea-
sure of University Reform is by no means confined
to those connected with the universities, inasmuch as
it embodies a principle which, once admitted, cannot
be restricted by a partial application, but must ex-
pand over our whole system and acquire universal
activity. I refer to the appropriation clause, by which
it is proposed to set aside the wills of founders and
endowers of colleges, in so far as regards the objects
of their testamentary bequests. A man born two or
three hundred years ago in a humble sphere, in the
county of Durham, or of Devon, receives his educa-
tion at an Oxford college, and rises in after life to an
eminent dignity in the Church or the law. Attached
to his birthplace, proudly conscious that lie has illus-
trated it, and grateful to his instructors, he wills to
the college where he was trained for his successful
career property to endow a certain number of fellow-
ships, on the condition that a preference of election
shall be given, first to his own kindred, and secondly
to the natives of his own county, to which he desires
an enduring monument of his attachment to be pre-
served.
After the lapse of some centuries the "Friends of
Progress " discover that his will does not coincide
with their notions, and that he might have disposed
of his property more advantageously to the public,
which is exceedingly probable, since of " the public "
he most likely was thinking but little. Accordingly
they set to work to reconstruct his will so as to de-
feat his intended provision for his family or his.
birthplace.
In deference to these gentlemen I do not, of
course, grudge the universities their emancipation
from such testamentary restraints, but I must pro-
test against their monopoly of so convenient a licence.
What is justice to one is justice to another. Let us
hear no more of Dulwich masters and wardens of the
name of Allen. The "Friend of Progress" knows
there is no virtue in a name, and it is mere vanity in
a testator to prefer his own to so many others quite
as euphonious. Besides, who knows that by adhe-
ring to the injunction he may not be all the while
defeating the real purpose of the founder? Lord
John Russell announces that such is the decided
opinion of Archbishop Whately. He does not, in-
deed, state the process of reasoning by which that
celebrated dialectician arrived at his conclusion ; but
it is most creditable to his ingenuity, and proves how
thoroughly he has identified himself with the country
of his adoption.
None need travel far from home for an opportunity
of availing himself of this valuable corrective of the
prejudices and caprices of our forefathers. There is,
for instance, within a few miles of my residence, s
school endowed by a rich bequest, to which the
children of three contiguous parishes, where the
founder's estates were situated, are exclusively wl•
missible. Archbishop Whately would, I feel con-
vinced, consider the true intentions of the testator to
be better observed by extending the benefit to the
children of my parish. Again, a gentleman in the
same neighbourhood died lately and left a large sum
for building a church, in which the rites of the.
Establishment are to be exclusively celebrated,.
though nearly one-fourth of the district is composed
of Dissenters, besides a considerable portion exempt.
from any religions predilections. What must be the
feelings of the " Fnend of Progress" upon so narrow
and illiberal a limitation? But examples equally re-
pugnant to the " exigencies of the age " might be
multiplied ad infinitum.
I would suggest, sir, that a commission be ap •
pointed for carrying out this principle of the
University Reform Bill (should the answer of the
Times be affirmative of its serious character). It.
might be called the Testamentary Commission. It
would consist (of course) of barristers of six years'
standing, one or more of whom (the expense to be,
paid by a tax levied on the landowners) should.
establish, in every county, a court of inquiry into the
provisions of all wills by which schools, hospitals,
asylums, churches, charities, &c., are at present en.
dowed and supported. The whole to be under the
control of the Court of Chancery, which, instead of
the laborious and uncertain task of extracting from
obscurely-worded instruments and contradicter/
codicils what was the intenticn of a testator, would
exercise the far easier and nobler function of deciding
what it ought to have been.
Of the further extension of the principle to that
species of property now called "private," the
"Friend of Progress" may be hopeful for what
advantage does the public derive from the Duke of
Sutherland possessing an entire county, or the Duke