The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

HERALD.—The suppression of vagrancy and the
extinction of the National Debt may be almost
ranked as parallel enterprises. We have scarcely
any more hope of the one than of the other. It may
be well to aim at the highest kind of success. Yet
we doubt whether a fond delusion is altogether a
healthy thing. We are now encouraged to believe
that, by the adoption of two or three peculiar clauses
in the Metropolitan Houseless Poor Bill, the reproach
of mendicancy will be altogether swept from the
streets of London, providing the bill passes into law
and the authorities are faithful to its provisions. The
grand panacea is found in the granting of enlarged
powers to the police, whereby the latter will be
enabled to convey all destitute persons not having
committed or being charged with any offence punish-
able by law, to the nearest casual ward or work-
house, where such persons will find shelter, and
where they will receive some measure of relief. It
is expected, on the other hand, that being thus
enabled to provide for what may be termed the de-
serving members of the vagrant class, the police will
supplement the process by taking before the magis-
trates all who are mere professional beggars andim-
postors. This they might have done long ago, and
so far as concerns the plan of handing over the
really destitute to the parish authorities, even that
has been a legal and practicable duty on the part of
the police during the temporary operation of the
Houseless Poor Act. The President of the Poor-
law Board recently stated in Parliament that in the
case of the Strand Union an arrangement had been
made between the guardians and the police, whereby
the police-station became a species of relieving office
where tickets were distributed conferring the right
of admission to the casual ward. The same provi-
sion was available for all the metropolitan parishes,
and Sir Richard Mayne had announced that three
constables would be placed at the disposal of each
board of guardians for such purpose. Only one union,
however, took advantage of the offer, and it is com-
plained that the streets still swarm with beggars, and
did so while the temporary act was supposed to be
in full operation. At the same time, we make no
questionthatthat the amended bill, if passed into law,
will be far more perfect than that which existed
during the past winter, and the results will be more
complete. After all the boasting which inaugurated
the defunct measure, it is palpable that from some
caue or other it fell short of its promise. In the case
of three important parishes the relief was so niggard
that the expense has been disallowed, on the ground
that the act has not been complied with. In two
of these cases—St. Mary, Rotherhithe, and St.
George the Martyr, Southwark—it was shown by
Mr. Henley in the recent debate, that the mode in
which the poor creatures were " packed" away, was,
to say the least of it, highly objectionable on the
score of health. But for the fact that it was winter
instead of summer a case of asphyxia might have
been expected. In St. George's, Southwark, it would
appear by the returns that the women were not
allowed sufficient space to lie side by side upon the
floor • and it was suggested by the hon. member
who drew attention to the fact that these recipients
of parochial hospitality must have laid one upon
another, somewhat after the fashion of " candles in
a shop window." Turning, however, from the con-
templation of these horrors, we are flattered with
the expectation that destitution is at last to be
vigorously dealt with—so far as concerns the me-
tropolis. The shameless scamp who hates work and
simulates misery must fly from the capital, or
Policeman X will take him by the arm and do his
best to get him lodged in gaol. This, we say, might
have been done before ; but the mere fact that there
was no certain relief for destitution practically un-
nerved the arm of the law, and beggary was gene-
rally winked at, though occasionally punished.
Now there is to be no more of it—the poor law at
last is to relieve us of this pest. The suffering poor
are to be taken under shelter, and the scamps are to
be left for the gaoler. Encouraged by the perma-
nency of the law, the metropolitan, parishes are ex-
pected to prepare sufficient wards, and the very sight
of a beggar isto be unknown in the streets of London.
We wish it may come to pass; but we have our doubts.
The deserving poor must be really cared for, for this
purging of our thorougnfares can only be accom-
plished by a process which will multiply the deaths
by starvation which now horrify us so often in the
records of the coroner's court. The question arises—
Will the guardians allow effective relief ? The fact
is, that at the present time the poor rates have to be
largely supplemented by the hand of private charity.
Not only do we find the casual wards of the work-
houses opened under the provisions of a general me-
tropolitan rate, but at the same time the "refuges"
and " asylums," provided by the voluntary benevo-
lence of the public, are in full operation, receiving
more than 27,000 persons during the month of
January. It is notorious that in the case of paupers
receiving regular out-door relief the allowance is
often so small as scarcely to pay for the rent of the
miserable room in which the "recipient dwells. But
for private beneficence, either the poor rates must
rise or many of the poor must perish. The clergy of
those parishes which contain a large leaven of the
working classes can 'tell sorrowful tales of the desti-
tution which they are compelled to witness, and for
the relief of which they are perpetually imploring
funds from the rich and charitable. The poor law
administers but a part of the relief which is required
for the sustenance of those who from sickness,
widowhood, or other causes, are rendered really des-
titute. Many a half-starved woman carries on a
practical mendicancy under the guise of . selling
some trifling articles which she carries in her hands
from house to house. If this be vagrancy the law
dare not touch it ; for if it is to be prevented
there must .b 3 a wondrous enlargement in the
amount of out-door relief, or else in the size of our
metropolitan workhouses, unless we are to build
bigger prisons, and shut up the destitute out of our
sight along with thieves and veritable vagabonds.
At the same time we have no objection to the
experiment on which Mr. Villiers seems so san-
guine. Some good will come of it, no doubt. It
will throw the plumb-line a little deeper, and show
yet more distinctly how far we have come short of
a law which really helps the destitute while it
frowns upon the idle and disorderly. The tempo-
rary nature of the relief offered under the proposed
system is one defect. Destitution is a slow fever,
and is not soon over. There is misery in this
mighty London which needs a very patient and dis-
criminating hand for its successful treatment. We
have great faith in the operation of our voluntary
institutions. The money placed in the hands of the
clergyman of an east end parish goes far more
directly to the relief of the poor than the so much
per pound which is paid in obedience to the demand
of the overseer. The poor rate is a compound
article, only a small portion of which goes towards
filling the belly or clothing the back of the hungry
and ragged Lazarus who appears at the gate. There
are those Who boast of the poor law ; but to this
hour the relief of the poor is very largely dependent
on other hands than those of the parish officer. The
police are now called to the rescue, and we are told
to expect great things when the man of the trun-
cheon helps to distribute the parish loaf. The beg-
gars are to vanish, and we hope they may ; but we
have no doubt that destitution will yet remain, and
we are rather doubtful whether even the beggars will
be got rid of. No modification of the poor law will
be successful until the guardians are able and willing
to afford effective relief.
TIMES.—The result of the elections inNew Bruns-
wick is now completely known, and it is quite as
adverse to the prospects of Confederation as was
anticipated in the letter which we recently noticed.
Out of the 41 members who compose the Assembly
30 are returned in opposition to the scheme, so that
its rejection must be expected by a majority of three
to one. There is reason to fear that this unfortu-
nate result will greatly affect the decision of Nova
Scotia, and Newfoundland, it is said, will require
the exercise of considerable influence to insure the
success of the proposal. In short, there can, we
fear, be little doubt that the prospects of the
scheme were at first represented to us in too flatter-
ing colours. It was said to have the approval of
the Colonial Governments and of the principal
members of the Oppositions. We are now told that,
at least in New Brunswick, it was only approved by
a majority of the Government, and that if the
leading members of Opposition assented they ex-
pressed no opinion but their own. Under such cir-
cumstances the project must probably be considered
to have failed for the time, and indeed we lately
published the intelligence that one of the Govern-
ments had already assumed its failure, and had pro-
posed to proceed instead with the scheme for the
legislative union of the Martime Provinces, which
was already under formal discussion last year,
when the larger scheme was started. To any such
scheme, however, even if completely arranged be-
tween the Maritime Provinces, the assent of the
Home Government would, of course, be necessary,
and we should be justified in refusing our consent to
a partial Union when a wider, and therefore more
complete, Federation has been proposed, and has
been heartily accepted by the most important of the
colonies. If the New Brunswickers and other colo-
nists reject so peremptorily a proposal which we
think desirable, they could have no reason to coin-
plain if we acted from Imperial considerations in a
similar way. The motives of their perverse determi-
nation are but too evident. There is plainly, in the
first place, a keen jealousy of Canada, and a very
strong dislike to any plan by which the minor Pro-
vinces would become liable to the influence of the
larger colony. The New Brunswickers say they are
very good friends with the Canadians, and wish to
remain so, but that is no reason why they should
enter into a partnership with them. They have,
they say, no common commercial interests, and it
may be added that the present establishment of a

separate governor for every colony creates a definite
I pecuniary interest in preserving their isolation. There
is, too, an avowed mistrust of the motives by which
the Canadian politicians are actuated. It is believed
that the chronic difficulties between Upper and
Lower Canada are as troublesome as ever, and that
the politicians of both parties are seeking a way out
of their difficulty by obtaining the separation of
the two provinces under the cover of a general
Federation. These are in substance the views re-
presented in the letter upon which we lately com-
mented, and the justice of that representation is
since amply confirmed. We need not repeat the
arguments which we urged at that time in answer to
these narrow and one-sided motives. Of course
New Brunswick would have to give up something,
and it is easy to make out a respectable list of
disadvantages ; the question, as in all such cases,,
is whether these are not more tban balanced
by advantages, and of these latter we do not read
that any account has been made. What may
be the object of the Canadians is not worth discus-
sion. Half the useful things that are done in the
world are done from selfish motives under the cover
of larger designs. There is, however, one of these
arguments which seems to us to be refuted in great
measure by the maritime colonists themselves. They
have, they say, no common commercial interests
with Canada. But, at the same time, they are
clamouring eagerly for the completion of the Inter-
colonial Railroad. What can be the use of such a
railroad if they neither have, nor wish to have,
commercial relations with Canada? For our part,
we can conceive nothing more desirable than the
establishment of such relations, and to encourage
them might be one of the most beneficial results of
the proposed Federation. There is probably, how-
ever, a further and still less satisfactory reason for
this disposition of the Maritime Provinces. We
noticed in the letter of " Union" the other day that
scarcely anything was said of the importance of the
Federation as a means of defence. That is one of
the chief motives urged by the Canadian Govern-
ment, and is one of the principal reasons why the
scheme is thought desirable in this country. It seems,
however, to have little weight in the Maritime Pro-
vinces. The fact is, they do not feel the danger,
and are not so sensible of the sacrifices which
threaten them as Canada is ; and this, probably,
for two reasons. In the first place, as Canada
is the principal colony, they may think that it
would be the main object of attack and the chief
sufferer in a war. Newfoundland, indeed, and
Prince Edward Island may perhaps delude them-
selves with the notion that they are sufficiently pro-
tected by the sea. But there is a further reason
still. They have a notion that we might, without
serious danger, decline to defend Canada, but that
we should find it absolutely necessary to hold at
all cost the Maritime Provinces, as affording us
our only naval station in the orth American
waters. They suppose, therefore, that are shall be
sure to defend them, whatever they may do for
themselves. Moreover, out of the small and sparse
population of the minor colonies it would be ab-
surd for us to expect the formation of any effective
militia, and therefore, so long as they retain their
feeble individuality, they fancy themselves secure
from all the ordinary sacrifices of independence. If
they were incorporated with one large Federation,
they would have to contribute their proportion both
of men and money. It will be strange if the recent
debates on Canadian defences do not show them
that these calculations are entirely mistaken. What
points of the Maritime Provinces it might be neces-
sary for us to hold in the event of war with the
United States need not be considered. It is certain
that it would be unnecessary to hold the whole of
their territory, and that from a military point of
view it would be undesirable. If ever we attempted
to defend either Canada or New Brunswick, it would
only be in the event of ' the colonists displaying so
resolute and high-spirited a determination to defend
their soil that we should feel bound in honour to
support them even at a great sacrifice. For the sake
merely of maintaining our ultimate possession of
the colonies it would be unnecessary, and probably
very imprudent, to adopt such a course. In any
case, such a system of defence must he for all the
North British. Provinces together. If, in short, these
colonies ever wish us to defend their whole soil, they
must combine in a general organization and in
mutual assistance. These unsatisfactory revelations
could not come at a more opportune moment than
when we are considering what course to take with
regard to Canadian defence. It is plain that Canada
is not the only colony which will think itself entitled
in the event of war to special and complete protec-
tion from all the consequences of invasion, and with
the whole force of the Empire. We must make up
our minds, once for all, whether we will admit any
such claim. If the Canadians think that because the
Empire would suffer in Canada we should be bound
to defend it there, we should recommend the depu-
tation which is about to come over here to take a
few lessons in boxing. They would then learn that
one of the first maxims of self-defence is not to put
your hand wherever you are hit or expect to be hit.
If the French invaded Ireland, and we thought we
could better make them loose their hold by a counter
invasion of France than by fighting a battle in Con-
nemara, we should certainly never listen to such
nonsense as that every man in Connaught had a
right to protection from the enemy. From the
Peloponnesian War downwards, it has always been
the hardest part of a General's duty to persuade his
countrymen that the half is often better than the
whole, and that even to abandon everything for the
time may be the best means of regaining everything
in the end. But it is a lesson which must be sooner
or later learnt, and the 'House of Commons ought
to have the courage, if necessary, to enforce it upon
the colonies.