The New York herald., 1874-11-30
LYRIC HALL.
O. B. Frothingham On Charity and the
Poor.

o. B. rockingham ON Charity and the
Poor.
Owing to the unpleasant weather yesterday
there was a very small attendance at Lyric Hall.
Mr. Frothingham read extracts from the Apostle
Paul. Persian. Buddhist and Hlndoo and other
Scriptures. Alter the singing OF hymn, he satd =:
The subject OF my discourse is charity and the
poor. which Is one that presses earnestly on all
men on the edge OF what is likely to be stern
winter, is subject OF personal interest, and If
regarded would be more easily dealt with, II
in times OF prosperity provision would be made
for adversely But as 1t ls we face questions at q
moments notice which contain great problems,
with time too short to discuss them. But we must
not complain. Times oil discussion are not chosen,
but appointed, and in spite OF all lmpedlments the
dii1culty will be met as well as possible. From
two sides come applications all the time; on one
hand are those who call on US to be generous and
quote all the texts which urge US to be thoughtful
OF others and thoughtless OF ourselves. On the
other hand are those who hold up the warning
finger saying "Be careful lest you do harm when
you would do good be careful lest you encourage
idieness; be careful lest you perpetuate an evil
which ages shall be insufficient to wear away.n
We lend an ear to the call oil charity, and then to
the warning OF wisdom, and most halt
and hesitate, and undo with the right hand what
they do with the Left The truth is there are two
theories on this subject OF charity and the poor
theories that cannot work together-tne Old
World theory and the New; the theory OF the New
Testament and the theory OF social science
II Is clearly written in the New Testament in
passages too numerous to quote; for instance, q
rich young man, beautiful, generous, noble, whose
aspect interested Jesus, asked Him the way to
eternal lie. Seli what thou hast and give to the
poor;n and in Luke 1t Is written "Blessed are ye
door; woe unto you who are rich." The
original Gospel, says:-"Know you not that
God mas chosen the poor" This was the lesson
lesson OF every evangelist; the theory OF the New
Testament through and through. In the New
Testament 1t Is taken lor granted that this world
Is soon coming to an end, and the people are
urged every account TO disencumDer them
selves OF everything which Will make dlticult
their entrance INTO heaven. Tne doctrine OF the
New Testament is that poverty is privileged con-
dtlon; that the duty OF the rich is. to give
to the poor; that the title of exist.
1t Is this theory which the early Cnrstians
bequeathed 10 the later. rms Is the theory OF the
been the theory oil Christendom from the first
day to this IL Is this theory that mas gathered to-
gelher the poor IN c0nservatOres In the Middle
Ages poverty was held to be virtue, anu II a man
wished to be specially religious he disencumbered
himself OF everything, took upon himself vow 10
earn nothing and to give the opportunity to his
fellow men OF earning heaven py Keeping him
TO "e Now w are S
quences OF this theory? 1t Is OF the utmost impor-
tance to understand distinctly that the single
fruit OF this institution OF charity has oeen
THE INSTITUTION OF PAUPERIsM.
II is often said nat tne industrial age is respon-
sible Tor the poor. Poverty is chronic. Poverty
prevailed all over europe at the time the modern
world began TO open It's eyes. The industrial age
met THIS dliicuty at the outset. 1t struggled
against it; 1t hung itself into deadly grapple
WIN TINS visible foe IN the dark. Unframed IN
experienced, taken oy storm as 1t Struggled TO It's
feet, 1t Was met by TINS gigantic Toe, which en-
deavored to strike 1t down. The Industrial age
has not created poverty. Poverty IS against the
very genius OF It, The Industrial age has one
tnug IN vlew-to lit poverty up, and ~ has dmn-
ished poverty almost lnconcevaDly Long before
the industrial age, IN the fourteenth century,
pauperlsm was such an intoerable nuisance
that laws were made to preventit IT. They were
very severe laws, and they have been soltened by
time; but sll IL mas been Impossible TO neutral!Ze
the old system. II one thing has been demon
strated, IT is that the New Testament theory OF
charity to the poor has lailed Tor the New lesta-
4 ment never Contemplated continuance or the
world and methods instituted Tor passing word
never could oe appropriate TO permanent or
4 gJnZatlon, and consequently 1t has ANONYMOUSLY
JAILED. TINS tact has no eject IN the Roman
Protestant. But TO rational people, who simply
study aud think. IL is very serious ana fatal OBJ
lection to the theory tnat 1t has wrought no dml-
discussed, the most nign-minded aud lar.
sighted people say, "put tnat old method
one thing tnat independence is the riRntfnl pre-
rogatlve oil every human being, that poverty Is
out OF place." am persuaded tnat II New York
could once with united mind decide TO adjure en-
trey for a single winter the whole theory OF
almsglving II IL coulu be made rule to give
nothing, lood, clothing or money-it would De a
stern, hard thing 10 do, but II II could be done-I
am satisfied that the benedt to society would at
! once be Ielt. There are twice as many charitable
societies in New York as are needed The society
for Improving the Condition OF the Poor" aoae,
would be able to take cnarge OF all the poor in New
YORK. Let US not defend IL II we cannot drop 1t.
II the theory IS wrong lind new one But we
are told that amsgvng Is an instinct OF human
nature. Is IL an nstinct2 Is IL not rather tradi-
ton memory We are told 10 cultivate
the benencent affections and TINS ls the way to
do IL: but is there other way9 Can we not visit
the poory Do not pity them by penny. TO
make almsgivinR rule Is great mistake.
Every year the United states government spends
several millions on the Indians: agencies are
1 established at different points, with what enectf
The Indians are more and more becoming vaga.
Ianu tho