The Sun.
London, England, 1869-12-16 00:00:00

THE '.RESIDENT OF THE TOOR-LATV
BOARD ON CHARITIES.

The Right Hon. G. J. Goschen, M.P., made a speech on
Wednesday on the organisation of poor relief. He attended
a conference at the well-known Sion College—a corpora
tion of metropolitan clergymen—and spoke to a resolution
setting forth " That it is desirable to promote concerted
action among those engaged in the distribution of
charitable relief in the City and the Eastern
districts of London, with a view to prevent wasteful
expenditure, to discourage imposture, to check the increase
of pauperism, and to make adequate provision for the de-
serving poor." The right hon. gentleman referred to the
difficulty of defining the limits between legal and charit-
able relief. The principle of the Poor-law, of which he
and the guardians present were the representatives, was
to administer the minimum of relief only. It was by no
means certain that the Poor-law itself—not the Act of
1834 merely, but the Poor-law dating back from the time
of Elizabeth—was not responsible for a vast amount of
pauperism by establishing the principle that every man—
every pauper—whatever, his antecedents, was entitled to
relief at the expense of the country—a principle which
prevailed in no other country. There were at length
symptoms that that distaste to receive parish relief which
had, to the credit of the poorest classes, survived so long,
was e.;inning to decline. Within the last few days he
had observed that the miners in one district, on being in-
vited to join a benefit society to which the mine-owners
contributed, for providing for the relief of the workers in
sickness, desired to make it a condition that the
allowance from the society should not be taken into
account when they received relief from the parish.
It was important, therefore, that the,/ should
do nothing to expand the Poor Law so as to
further subsidise pauperism, which would be the
effect of giving through it a sort of legal recognition
of the different charities established for relieving distress.
At present the Poor Law and the charities acted
independently, and that independent action he
would not disturb, but he thought by a system
of registration of relief the co-operation of the charities
and the boards of guardians in distributing relief might
be secured. Believing any general metropolitan scheme
hopeless, he thought it would be better to leave it to be
worked by unions or parishes. He suggested that the
guardians, where disposed to co-operite with the
charities, should appoint a committee to -Meet weekly,
fortnightly, or monthly, according to the exigencies of
the case, and invite the representatives of the leading
charities in the parish or union to meet them, together
with such ministers of religion as they might wish to
obtain information frern, and that at such interviews, lists
should be interchanged of all persons receiving relief from
either source. In any district where the charities would
co-operate and act together, the committee would repre-
sent the associated charities, but where that was
not practicable, the representatives of the charities
would be brought together on the invitation of
the guardians. In this way, if all parties
were willing to unite, he thought a fairly accurate
register might within six weeks be prepared of all who
were in receipt of either pauper or charitable relief. Pau-
perism in the metropolis was so vast that few, if any,
could measure its exact rate. It varied from 125,000 to
150,000 weekly, and the weekly returns proved that
150,000 people in the metropolis were in a chronic state of
pauperism. The normal amount was 125,000, and every
winter about from 20,000 to 40,000 were added to it. The
difficulty was how to deal with, not the exceptional, but
the normal amount, It was a mistake to suppose that
there was a large proportion of able-bodied amongst those
habitually receiving relief. On the contrary, of the
153,000 who were on tho lists on the Ist of January, not
more than the odd 3,000 were able-bodied men, fit to do a
clay's work—the rest being made up of women, children,
and old, sick, and infirm. At present the distribution
from the charities was very unequal, for while in some
parishes there was the Poor-law relief supplemented
by charity, in others scarcely any charitable relief other
than under the Poor-law was dispensed at all. Exception
had been taken to that part of the late Poor-law. minute,
referring to the adequacy of the relief. It was said, test
it by this : withdraw the charities, would the guardians
not say that they were not bound to give adequate relief ?
But the law of the land fixed no limits to the amounts
of relief, or the amount of the fund to be raised in
rates. Whatever was necessary must be spent, and if
the charity was withdrawn the guardians must step in
and give that which was necessary up to that point of
minimum relief. They must give adequate relief. But
the answer was, they did not; and why did they not ?
Because the charities were doing it for them. But the
point was, whether it was more economical in the long run
to give this half kind of relief, leaving the poor with two
strings to their bow—the Poor-law and the charities, or
to give more adequate relief at once, and give it under
greater supervision? He spoke not on his own authority
in this matter, for at a meeting of a board of guardians
last year it was laid down that to give ample relief, when
relief was given at all, was more economical in the interest of
the ratepayers than to give insufficient relief. It it were
said en either hand, We have not money enough to relieve
effectually, it would be better to divide the cases, leaving
half to the Poer-law and half to the charities. He con-
cluded by promising the cordial co-operation of the Poor-
law Board in carrying cut the object of the meeting; but
reminded the representatives of the boards of guardians
and charities present that the arrangements for concerted
action must come from themselves.

There was a very mixed assembly at the meeting where
this address was delivered. Dissenting ministers and
clergymen, lay visitors and guardians, members of the
Poor-law Board and trustees of charities mingled together.
The discussion neon the resolution was an interesting one.
The Earl of Lichfield joined in it, and said that, in refe-
rence to Mr. Goschen's suggestion that the boards of
guardians should form committees to confer with the mana-
gers of the organised charities, they would experience
considerable difficulty in the prejudice and ignorance
which in many instances they would be met with.
Some charity managers would say, "We prefer you
should not know what we are doing, as, if we tell you,
you will regulate your relief accordingly, which is not our
object." And others would regard the inquiry as preli-
minary to a more direct interference with the charitable
societies. He was in favour of the organisation being made
applicable to the whole metropolis. Ho explained the
principle on which his society acted, and pointed to its
operation as an example of what might be done by co-
operation in repressing vagrancy and fraud. The resolu-
lution was carried, and also another for the appointment
of a committee to carry out the principlescontained in it.

Four men have died of Asiatic cholera, almos
suddenly, at the Moscow railway station.

Our readers may be interested in learning that the
Rev. Father Montsabra, of the Order of Preaching Friars.
who is preaching at Notre Dame, Paris, as the successor of
Father Hyacinthe, was born at Blois in 1822. When
ordained, he distinguished himself by preaching through-
out Lent in Orleans, and afterwards went to Belgium as
tutor to the children of Count de Brigode. Having read
the lectures of Father Lacordaire in 1850, he wrote to him
asking to be received as a novice. His desire was acceded
to, and he became one of the most fervent disciples of that
theologian. The subject chosen for the pulpit discourses at
Notre Dame is the (Ecumenical Council.

To THOSE WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.—The
criminal classes, and those who cater for their wants,
evidently take a lively and intelligent interest in the
arrangements which society finds it necessary from time to
time to make for their benefit. The following is the title-
page of a cheap edition of a late Act of Parliament :
" Just out;one penny, ' The Habitual Criminal Act, 1869,'
completely annihilating the receivers of stolen property,
considerably affecting publicans, beer, and refreshment-
house keepers, &c. ; and of importance to marine store
dealers, being the most stringent Act passed for the appre-
hension, conviction, and punishment of offenders against
the law, and causing an entire revolution in criminal
society."

THE OPPOSITION TO DR. TEMPLE.--The Guardian,
in its extended report of the confirmation of Dr. Temple's
election, furnishes some particulars in themselves suffi-
ciently ludicrous, but which are painfully illustrative of
the spirit in which the legal " opposition" to the new
Bishop of Exeter was adopted. The opposers, it seems,
traversed the whole petition—that is to say, they objected
to Dr. Temple's confirmation on all possible grounds. They
commenced by requiring proof of the Bishop-elect having
been "born in lawful wedlock," and proof that he was "a
prudent and discreet man, and eminent for his knowledge
of the Holy Scriptures, and for his life and morals
deservedly commended." As it was only known on the
previous day that these objections would be raised, it is
even said that Dr. Temple's sister (some years older than
himself) had to be telegraphed for in the night to give
secondary evidence on the first point, and Mr. Lingen
roused from his bed to speak—after thirty years' intimacy
—as to the second. Among the proctors who had been
appointed to appear for the Dean and Chapter, were Mr.
Arthur James Day and Mr. John Hassard, who had
been entrusted with the perusing of Dr. Temple's papers,
and they were ready with the affidavits which the extra-
ordinary tactics of the opposition had rendered necessary;
but the affidavits, it is said, were only filed in the court
five minutes before going into church. The Guardian
adds that " according to the records of the Archbishop's
Court, proof on those points has never been required since
the confirmalion of Matthew Parker, Archbishop of Can-
terbury, who died in 1575, and whose brother Sled an aftl,,,
iof Isla/1...J.4. kias ain IltakkwaNcttugazir —"