New-York tribune., 1908-07-12
THE OLD AGE PENSIONS sCHEME.

Mr. Asquith has succeeded where Mr. GLAD
stone failed. The earlier statesman asked the
United Kingdom TO sign and deliver to him
blank check which he might fill out with such
an amount of Irish or other legislation as
might please him, but the electorate declined TO
do So Mr. Asquith has not asked the signing
Of a blank check. but he has filled out check
with an amount which is carefully concealed
from the public and which he does not himself
exactly know. and has asked Parliament to
sign il for the nation; and the House of Com
mons has done so with only ten dfssentent
votes and the House of Peers is confidently
expected to do so with only nominal demur
1t is an extraordinary performance, Whlch our
London correspondent using another slmle,
aptIy describes as leap In the dark after
game of blind mans buff. Nobody knows how
much the scheme of old age pensions is going
to cost while everybody is sure that, however
much it may cost at the beginning, the amount
will soon be vastly increased by extension of
the system to a lower age limit and perhaps
also TO a larger stipend1ary rate.
The reasons for this remarkable procedure
are not difficult to discern. One is that the
British Parliament and people have more than
ordinary confidence in the Prime Minister,
especially as q safe fnancier. Safeness has,
indeed. always been regarded as Mr.. Asquiths
dominant quality. and in this acceptance Of his
dubious scheme the highest possible recognition
of it has been given. Another is the universally
conceded need of doing something for the re-
lief of the poor, and particularly of the aged
DOOR In emerging from the dark ages OF Bum
bledom the British nation has set itself reso-
lutely to the task of raising the standard of
life among the people and even among the de-
pendent classes of society And as the very
names of poorhouse and poor relief are in
measure associated with the old regime the
people gladly turn TO the scheme of pensions,
which has been acceptably adopted in some
British colonies and other lands and the name
of which has a much more pleasing and honor
able sound than aims. In all that it is easy to
sympa thize with them. Indeed, it would be
difficult not to do Yet the thoughtful OBJ
server will doubtless agree with our London
correspondent in regarding the pending meas
ure as crude, and as inferior to the German
pension system in that it does not, as the latter
does, require contributory cooperation from
prospective benefciaries while they are yet
able bodied and selfsupporting.
We NAV go beyond that even, and from the
American point of view regard Great Britain as
either handicapped in dealing with the whole
subject by her unfortunate fiscal system, or as
being impeIled by that system to seek wrong
solution of 1t. 1t will not be disputed, we
think that the ideal social system would be
that in which there were no dependent classes,
unless the comparatively few who were af-
ficted with abnormal infirmities, or stricken
with ,1nforeseeable disaster and that the bet
ter aim of legislation, of administration ana
of industrial and social endeavor is not merely
TO take care of the aged poor but TO enable all
men to provide for their own care in age-1n
brief to promote thrift and self-sufficfent COM
petence rather than TO provide pensions for
paupers 1t would doubtless be impossible to
maintain that all pauperism in the United
Kingdom was due to the prevailing fiscal sys-
TEN. But it is quite certain that fifty years
practice of Cobdenism has not only failed to
abolish pauperism but has actually, according
to competent authorities, permitted its relative
increase, and has also deprived the nation of
the means of relief. Under free trade poverty
prevails Yet free trade does not give adequate
revenue to relieve il. Pensions therefore may
work the destruction OF the fiscal system which
forced their adoption