, 1876-02-12

- NHAN - @"''S "'NHNN 1900 NN''S =
tenn than belongs TO the almsgiving of private
persons. Nobody is guaranteed against desti-
tuition, consequently nobody has any right to
claim to be relieved at the hands of the proper
authorities. This is the state Of things that
some political philosophers would wish to see
reproduced in England. They argue, with
much force, that a Poor-law fosters careless
living, by shielding men and women from the
natural consequences CT negleCting thrift.
The utmost that a labOurer can ordinarily
hope to do is TO provide for a bare subsistence
in old age. To do this implies a constant
struggle against the present desire to spend
money, and considering what the poor man
who has saved money sees if be compares his
lot With that Of the man who has lived a happy
go-luckylfe and saved nothing, he is not much
supported in his resistance. Everywhere there
is an organised system administering q large
revenue by The lands Of numerous officers,
and this system exists for the sole purpose of
helping those who lave not chosen to help
themselves. What is the lesson which this
conveys to those who have been struggling to
help themselves all their lives 1t proclaims
that there is one end reserved for the careful
and the reckless, for him that saves money and
for him that spends it. What can demoralise
q society more surely than system which thus
encourages men to become a burden upon the
CULulIuully . " UNDERTAKING DoIUlC-uhuu " sup
port as many as offer themselves /
The truth Of all this must be admitted, yet
not without a reminder that there is another
side to the question which it is equally difficult
to put aside. In these Montreal riots, we see
what without the Poor.law would probably
have happened again and again in England.
A large number Of people find themselves des-
titute, and they ONE to the Municipal Autho-
rites with the demand that they shall find
them either food, or work that may enable
them to buy food. In theory, the duty
of the municipal authorities is plain.
These people have not been frugal or
Industrious, and they have no right to
lay the troubles which come from the
absence of these virtues at the door of the
community. If they can find relief from pri-
vate charity, we'll and good if not, their
miserable fate will convey a much-needed les
son to a class which seems deaf to any teaching
which is not imprinted on them by personal
suffering. As a matter of fact, the municipal
authorities said nothing Of the kind. On the
contrary, when a mob of some 1000 men
surrounded the town-hall, the Mayor addressed
them from the balcony, and told them that
the City Council was about to meet to give
their case its earnest consideration. We do
not say that the Mayor was right in using
this language, or that the City Council was
right in meeting TO consider a case which,
on strictly economical laws, had no proper
claim to be considered. But We do say that
no English mayor or town council would have
acted differently, assuming, that is, that the
crowd had not resorted to violence. At Mon
treal violence was used, but for our present
purpose this circumstanc may be left out of
consideration. Violence is often resorted to
when a large and hungry crowd is gathered
together, but there is no necessary connection
between the two and even if we grant that
the authorities of an English town would have
refused to listen to any complaints that were
not urged in an orderly and peaceable manner,
what would they have done with complaints
that were so urged2 In England, as it is, no
such difficulty could have arisen. The town
council would have referred the crowd to the
Guardians OF the poor, who would probably
have been holding daily sittings. under
the advice of a Government Inspector, for
the express purpose of dealing with the
case. But to the Montreal authorities, this
way out of the difficulty was not open.
because there is no Poor-aw in Canada.
The crowd damaged their chances by rioting,
but even as it was, public works were at once
ordered to be begun which would better
have been left to a milder season. Driven to
the choice between finding work and finding
food, the Montreal authorities elected to ind
work. They have thus landed themselves in the
principle of q Poor.law without q single one OF the
securities which a properly constructed Poor-law