The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT or TUB PUBLIC JOURNALS,

The Saturday Review draws a graphic picture of the
difficulties with which a kindhearted man has to contend
when he wishes to do something for the poor. A host of
,moieties beseech him to check his first instincts of benevo-
lence, and set before him the evils of indiscriminate alms.
giving.; but no sooner does he depute to his censors the
task of more widely ad ministering his charities, than these
locieties themselves are denounced as the chief producer:
*4 pauperism. He turns to the clergy, but the clergy are
'half comvinced that their course of la e has been only a
revival of the old system of doles ; while a chorus of
guardians attributes to the almoner, the sister of mercy,
and the district visitor the sudden increase of mendicancy
'which has undone the work of the poor laws. A little
discalnfited, perhaps, at finding that there is really sic
loom for any personal benevolence of his own, the
ithilanthropist buttons up his pocket, leaves the poor to
thepoor laws, and plunges into his Tieue. But even here
be is far from peace. Morning after morning hi
,breakfast table is seasoned with denuncin
the very system which professed to be el,
which protests against the incompetence of. the centr,
fffice, the ignorance of guardians, workhouse mismanage•
melt, the neglect of the sick, the starvation of the poor.
The Saturday Review thinks that the cure is to be found
in mote direct communication with the poor and in the
display 67 more personal interest towards them. It is not
a (pestle-dr:of giving money ; benevolence in this sense
destroys the %yery relation which a true friend to the poor
would wish to create. The sense of a friendly interest
taken in them, the offer of a healthy sympathy, the know-
ledge where to go for counsel and advice, the certainty
that there is someone to look to for help when help may
fairly and rightly be given, these are moral elements whose
power it would be impossible to exaggerate in the redemp-
tion of the poor. A word will often ensure the child's
regularity at school, the cleanliness of the house, respect.
able dress and demeanour. A very little time and thought
will often find new spheres of work for the unemployed,
get the girl out into decent service, or find the boy a
remunerative place. No one who has not worked per-
tonally among the poor knows how wanting they are in
shiftiness and inventiveness, how thriftless in prosperity,
how apathetic when the bad time comes. But it often
needs only a suggestion to induce them to "lay by," or to
rouse them to new efforts to obtain employment. That,
as a class, they are wonderfully grateful for any sympathy,
and inclined to repose only too great a confidence in any
whom they believe to be their friends, the experience of
every clergyman and district visitor could tell. The lesson
is a very simple and homely one, but it is a lesson of the
Elberfeld experiment, and it is none the worse for being
an answer to our wandering and disappointed philanthro-
pist. We would simply advise any reader who is gently
tormented with his desire to do some good to the poor,
to take the first four families on the relieving officer's list,
and to• see what a year's personal friendship, counsel,
and aid can do towards putting them into a position to
help themselves. _ _

tions

fileient

- -
The Spectator remarks upon the change which has taken
place in the views of the Home Secretary with respect to
the Ballot, and considers his approval of the measure to
be one of great importance. Mr. Austin Bruce has, we
believe, impressed both the late House of Commons and
the country generally as one of that most popular type of
English statesmen which, without being particularly
radical at heart, is radical through the firmness and clear-
ness of his intellect, which cannot endure to see a real evil
merely trimmed or truncated when it might be eradicated.
He is usually supposed—and, we believe, very justly—
to be a man whose actions have always a very strong pre-
sumption of reasonableness in their favour even when they
seem least reasonable ; and, certainly' his complete and
unanswerable vindicationof his, at first sight, unintelligible
leniency in advising the Queen to reprieve the convict
Bisgrove is another confirmation of the public confidence
in his strength of judgment. When, then, we find a states-
man of this type—without any of the old animus in favour
of a radical formula—telling his constituents that, in
spite of his dislike to secret voting, and his steady refusal
hitherto to support it, he has, under the lights of the facts
brought before him by the last election, decided that secret
voting involves less evil than open voting, and that he
shall support the Ballot in future, we cannot but
admit that the chances in favour of the Ballot
have assumed an entirely new aspect, and that
the reasons which have induced such a states-
man as Mr. Bruce to support it require and deserve
the gravest consideration. And this accordingly we now
propose to give it. Mr. Bruce admits that " the institutions
of a country ought to foster a manly, truthful, fearless
spirit, and that any institution which would have a con-
trary effect would be a mischievous institution." " I have
myself," continues Mr. Bruce, " often quoted the famous
saying of Sydney Smith that it was not by the ballot-box,
that it was not by concealing their political opinions, that
the Dutchmen drove the Spaniards out of Holland, or
that the Americans achieved their independence, and I
may add that it was not by secret but by open action that
Scotchmen maintained their civil independence and gained
their religious liberty. I have also, no doubt with con-
siderable truth, insisted on the benefit to all of us which
trial is, and that every man who once performed an action
which exposed him to risk was a stronger and a better man
for doing so." Yet, in spite of these admissions—which are,
by the way, far from bringing out the full strength of the
case against the Ballot—Mr. Brucehas withdrawn his objec-
tion to the Ballot on various grounds, chiefly this, that at
election times intolerance rises to so artificial a height that
even honest and brave electors are exposed to an amount
of insolent pressure—not only from the rich, but also from
the poor—which makes an election under the present law
an intolerable nuisance to them, and one to which they
ought not to be exposed.
- - -