The Sun.
London, England, 1854-01-20 00:00:00

Bank. If, in addition to this, he could have
taxed the operatives of England as he has done,
what an immense sum would soon have been at
the disposal of the now penniless weavers of
Preston. At the end of such a strike, instead of
being utterly helpless, they could have turned
manufacturers and helped themselves ; they could
have built several mills, and the masters' profits,
if as large as they say, would have paid them
better than their 10 per cent.—if not so large,
then it would have become clear that their de-
mand could not be afforded. Just let the men of
Preston bethink themselves of the savings of 1,000
mill hands, who should " combine" to save and
raise capital at the rate at which they are
now sacrificing it in wages. Five shillings
each would be 2501. a-week ; 10001. a-month !
Now, as it would be no difficult task for
men who showed such prudence and determina-
tion to borrow as much as they saved, it would
not be very long before they could set up as their
own masters.

Just this has been the course of half their actual
masters. They are men who rose from the ranks
by thrift and energy. They were not "dram and
jerry-shop men." They preferred saving to
spending, economy to self-indulgence. Their mas-
ters were glad to trust the more profitable posts
to men of sobriety and prudence ; and still econo-
mising and working at the same time, and ready
to work for anything rather than to lose their
time, they became confidential servants, junior
partners, and perhaps heads of firms at last. This
is the history of numberless master manufacturers
during the last half century. Some indeed think
—Mr. COBDEN amongst them—that were our
partnership laws altered, and limited liability
allowed, that manufactories could not be success-
fully worked on this principle, and that, after a
few trials, it would be given up. It may be so.
Still, we are for carrying out Free Trade in busi-
ness arrangements thoroughly ; and while glen.-
ing the requisite publicity as to the capital and
liabilities of a shareholding company, we demand,
on the part of the holder of savings, the right so
to invest them if he see fit. The result would
be the universal one—that some companies
would answer, and others would not. We are
quite confident th tt if working men were exten-
sively saving their money for such a purpose, no
Government, much less a constitutional one, could
refuse to place the law of partnership on a just
footing.

Even now our counsel to the men, if they wish
for ultimate victory, is, Return to work, and save.
Form a union to lay by weekly a respectable sum.
Do not place it in a common fund under the con-
trol of any committee, or delegates whatever ; put it
in the savings bank, invest it in a freehold land
society—in a word, deposit it where what you
have saved will be yours. If you wish to prove
your fidelity to each other, meet once a mouth or
so (not in a public-house), and produce your books.
What will be the result ? First, improved social
habits ; next, increased consideration and influence
with your employers and the community. No
master will lightly part with a large number of
thrifty hands, for they are sure to be reliable men
on the whole ; and no tradesman but will fear to
lose such customers. Very possibly you might be
for trying a joint-stock factory in small shares.
Well, you could then do it—such of you as
worked in it being paid the regular wages, and
all sharing in the profits, if any. Such is our
friendly advice to the " strikers," to strike against
the beer shopkeeper rather than their masters ;
against unthrift and waste, rather than against
wages which at least keep them in comfort. Of
one thing we are pretty confident, that when they
have sense and self-denial to get 201. or 501.
a-piece in the savings bank or elsewhere, they will
have also far too much sense to strike.

" The great principle of out-door relief is to
give the paupers exactly what they don't want,
and then they get tired of coming !" But for the
light thus thrown on the matter by the amorous
BUMBLE, it would be impossible to offer any
ration al explanation of proceedings otherwise
totally inexplicable. The distinguished " paro-
char functionary has, however, placed the matter
in a very striking point of view, enabling us to
understand clearly the motives by which the re-
lieving (!) officers, assistant overseers, et hoc genus
omne, are influenced in deciding on the various '
cases of distress brought under their consideration.
" The great principle is to give the paupers exactly
what they don't want." Thus in the parish of
Marylebone we find admission to the workhouse
pertinaciously refused to poor WALSH, his sick
wife just recovering from her accouchement, and
helpless infant, notwithstanding his numerous and
urgent applications. He was sternly told "to go
and work for them," despite his paralysed and use-
less right hand, and the knowledge that he could
obtain no employment which he could be capable
of discharging at that particular time. It was
not in the latter end of November that he could
hope to get " a little job of white-washing ;" nor
could the recently confined wife with her scantily
clothed infant, who had nothing to protect it from
the inclemency of the weather but " a cotton
bedgown," pursue her ordinary avocations as an
itinerant fruit-vendor. Even when examined on
the inquest of her unfortunate child, she was "in
a state approaching to imbecility." Under such
circumstances, a reception of the parties into the
House was manifestly the most eligible course,
but for that very reason their application was dis-
regarded, and the interrogatory of an Inspector
of the Poor—" Shall we take them in," answered
with a peremptory refusal—a refusal to which the
subsequent death of the baby, and the inquiries
since instituted in reference thereto, may be
directly attributed.
In a more recent case—a report whereof ap
peared in The Sun of Wednesday last, we find an-
other result following a totally different course,
but which, however, might be distinctly traced to
the working of the same grand principle. A poor
woman, named Ems, was found to have died on
Saturday morning last of the combined effects of
cold and hunger. When Mr. PEMBLE, the Beadle
and Inspector of Nuisances in the hamlet of Rad-
cliff—a man of a very different class from the
" BUMBLES" and "GRANNETS" so justly complained
of—attended in the miserable apartment of the
wretched victim, he discoverd the emaciated body
lying on " a heap of short and dirty straw,
which had very much the appearance of
chaff." The appearance of the entire affair was
truly deplorable—the corpse was " covered with
the remains of an old and ragged quilt. There
was no furniture, provisions, or fuel of any kind
in the place." The broken-hearted husband, who
might have envied his partner for her removal
from a scene of such unparalleled misery, was in
but little better plight. The vital principle was,
however, something stronger. He therefore
rallied ; but his wife, who was cold and motionless
when he recovered from his torpor—it could not
be called sleep—was found, on examination, to be
quite dead. And yet poor JoHN Ems had the
character of being a quiet, well-disposed, indus-
trious man ; one not willing to eat the bread of
idleness, or to look for eleemosynary support so
long as there was the slightest hope of his being
enabled to earn his own living. He was recog-
nised by many present in Court as an "
indus-
trious, civil, and well-conducted vendor of fruit,
well-known in the neighbourhood of Stepney."
Generally speaking, he could manage to get on
without parochial assistance—hardly enough, it is
true—but he was easily satisfied, and with his
afflicted wife was contented with coarse and scanty
fare, and a covering barely sufficient to avert the
very extremity of cold. A series of misfortunes
had, however, overwhelmed him. The high prices
of provisions and fuel had compelled. him to make free
with his capital. The very poor, however honest
and well disposed, cannot get credit. alas was
unable to replenish his empty basket. He was
turned out of the room he had long occupied in
Brook-street, Radcliff, because he could not pay
the rent, and was compelled to seek refuge in the
miserable hovel where his wife perished of starva-
tion. It was under such circumstances that he
applied to the relieving (!) officer of Stepney for
assistance, and if ever there was a case where it
should have been freely and
it was the one. few shillings, the
cheerfully afforded,
To Elms, a
price of a single basket of fruit, would have been