PRIVATE RELIEF OF THE POOR. 313 



each, citizen, there is a special plexus more familiar to him than 

 any other, and which has established greater claims on him than 

 any other. Every one who can afford to give assistance, is brought 

 by his daily activities into immediate contact with a cluster of 

 those who by illness, by loss of work, by a death, or by other ca- 

 lamity, are severally liable to fall into a state calling for aid ; and 

 there should be recognized a claim possessed by each member of 

 this particular cluster. 



In early societies, organized on the system of status, there 

 went, along with the dependence of inferiors, a certain kind of 

 responsibility for their welfare. The simple or compound family 

 group, formed of relatives standing in degrees of subordination, 

 and usually possessing slaves, was a group so regulated that while 

 the inferiors were obliged to do what they were told, and receive 

 what was given to them, they usually had a sufficiency given to 

 them. They were much in the position of domestic animals in 

 respect of their subjection, and they were in a kindred position in 

 respect of due ministration to their needs. Alike in the primitive 

 patriarchal system and in the developed feudal system, we see 

 that the system of status presented the general trait, that while 

 dependents were in large measure denied their liberty, they were 

 in large measure supplied with the means of living. Either they 

 were directly fed and housed, or they were allowed such fixed 

 proportion of produce as enabled them to feed and house them- 

 selves. Possession of them unavoidably brought with it care for 

 them. 



Along with gradual substitution of the system of contract for 

 the system of status, this relation has been changed in such man- 

 ner that while the benefits of independence have been gained the 

 benefits of dependence have been lost. The poorer citizen has no 

 longer any one to control him ; but he has no longer any one to 

 provide for him. So much service for so much money, has be- 

 come the universal principle of co-operation; and the money 

 having been paid for the service rendered, no further claim is 

 recognized. The requirements of justice having been fulfilled, 

 it is supposed that all requirements have been fulfilled. The 

 ancient regime of protection and fealty has ceased, while the 

 modern regime of beneficence and gratitude has but partially 

 replaced it. 



May we not infer, with tolerable certainty, that there has to 

 be re-instituted something akin to the old order in a new form ? 

 May we not expect that without re-establishment of the ancient 

 power of superiors over inferiors, there may be resumed some- 

 thing like the ancient care for them ? May we not hope that 

 without the formation of any legal ties between individuals of 

 the regulating class, and those groups whose work they severally 



