1806.] Jnsxoers lo Queries relative to Bees and Eels. 425 



money would be difpofed of towards its 

 relief. Excelfive indigence might have 

 fo enervated this man's mind, tiiut, alter 

 the firlt impulfe of gratitude for an un- 

 expetted favour, a repetition of the gift 

 injudicioully bellowed eliccted the de- 

 firuttion of that fenfe of difgrace on 

 receiving or alking charity whicli every 

 indepentlent individual dreads to expe- 

 rience. That man or that family which 

 habitually receives charity, whether it 

 be privately or demanded at the parifli 

 workhoufe, is as much tlcgraded in felt- 

 eftimation as the pauper who holds out 

 his hat in the Itreet; — the beiir^ary of the 

 mind is complete, a\id independence of 

 fituation and character are gone for 

 ever. Perhaps the only way in which 

 tlie affluent could molt eife6taally aflift 

 the poor, would be by encouraging them 

 whim young to the practice of econo- 

 mical habits, and inducing tiieni to lay 

 by the faviugs of their frugality agaiiill 

 the common accidents of our nature — 

 inririaity and age : any deficiency of 

 means in induitnous individuals, alter 

 their utmolt endeavours to make a fuffi- 

 cient provifion for thofe contingencies, 

 ilior.ld then he fupplied, not as an elee- 

 moiynary, but as a jull reward due to 

 thofc who had done all in their power to 

 prcferve their independence. 



The patrons of the inftitutions that 

 have been mentioned, are highly laud- 

 able in their endeavours to overcome 

 that delicacy which prevents perfons 

 who are in a depeiuleiit iituation from 

 entering into trade, or employing them- 

 felves to advantage. Private itidividuals 

 would thus be relieved from their fup- 

 port, and fociety would not be compelled 

 to ])ro\idc againit the chance, at leall, 

 of fome of tiiele perfons becoming a 

 burden to it. It ought, however, to be 

 conftantly kept in view, that the articles 

 fold in all inltitutions of this kind be at 

 the full price whicli would have been 

 cliurged for them had they been difpofed 

 of at the lliops in the regular way ; for 

 if they be of a:^ fair a quality, and at an 

 under price, a depreciation v. ill be ef- 

 fected in the value of the fame kiud of 

 goods cliewhere, and confeciuently a 

 degree of poverty in proportion to the 

 fum faved to the conkimer in the pur- 

 chaic. J)e Foe lays, ihut " to fet people 

 at work on the fanse thing which other 

 people were employed on before, with- 

 out increafmg the confuniption, is giving 

 looue what you take iVoiii another." 

 Perhaps, after all, the elVoi ts of the 



liberal might be exerted ftill better, by 

 putting the deftitutc and negletted poor 

 into a way of fupplying the wants of 

 each other, and tliereby producing aa 

 additional degree of comfort, without 

 difturbing any of the prefent arrange- 

 ments of trade. Perfons who have not 

 been previoully in the habit of labour, 

 Ihould be encouraged to manufacture 

 fuch articles of utility and tafte as might 

 be fuited to their refpeftive wants and 

 inclinations. If their iiiduftry were thus 

 increafed by the interchange of their 

 own wants, the introduction of tiiefe 

 new labourers into the market would not 

 depreciate the price of labour; and the 

 wants thus fupplied by their mutual ef- 

 forts would leave them ^^■it^.out occalion 

 for thofc pecuniary refources which, by 

 a miftaken application, are now coa- 

 veyed to them in the form of charitv. 



The avowed object of all our liberal 

 inftitutions is to " better the coaditioa 

 of the poor." I cannot help thinking 

 that a more enlarged objcd, and a more 

 corrc6t phrafeology, would be " to im- 

 prove the Hate of fociety;" and if num- 

 bers of our poor are obliged to remain 

 fcantily lodged and biidly clothed, the 

 advantage fociety would derive by ena- 

 bling them to barter all their wafte time 

 with each other would far exceed its ex- 

 pence : I lliould therefore advjle, as the 

 molt eftec^tual eftbrt of cliarity, that it 

 iliould enable the poor to wear more 

 llioes and better clothes, and to have 

 more comfortable dwellings, than they 

 can at prefent obtain. In order to elFctt 

 this, let the liberal, inftead of beftowing 

 alms upon beggars and idlers, club their 

 humanity for the purpofe of enabling 

 thofe people to make (hoes, clothes, &c., 

 which they iliould he p.aid for by articles 

 in their own requeft, and which the 

 other half-employed poor Ihould be ena- 

 bled to make for exchange. The defi- 

 ciency of a circulating medium amongil 

 them would thus be overcome ; and I 

 need not write a fyllable more to prove 

 that habits of economy and care would 

 fi)on put them into poifelfion of that fa- 

 cility. M. E. 

 Ja/j/ r, 1806. 



To l/ie Editor uf the Monthly Magazine. 



SIH, 



I DOUBT whether your Oxford corre- 

 I'poiident is ferious in his flatemcnt 

 of his fiippofed injury by his neighbour's 

 Aie.s'. There is a declamation, afcribed 

 to Ciuiutiliaii (clcgaut, by whomfoe\er 

 written). 



