THE NEW TORYISM. 439 



sire for public welfare no less great than that which in 1533 prescribed 

 the number of sheep a tenant might keep, or that of 1597, which com- 

 manded that decayed houses of husbandry should be rebuilt. Nobody 

 will dispute that the various measures of late years taken for restrict- 

 ing the sale of intoxicating liquors, have been taken as much with a 

 view to public morals as were the measures taken of old for checking 

 the evils of luxury, as, for instance, in the fourteenth century, when 

 diet as well as dress was restricted. Every one must see that the edicts 

 issued by Henry VIII, to prevent the lower classes from playing dice, 

 cards, bowls, etc., were not more prompted by desire for popular wel- 

 fare than were the acts passed of late to check gambling. 



Further, it is no part of my present purpose to question the wisdom 

 of these modern interferences, which Conservatives and Liberals vie 

 with one another in multiplying, any more than the wisdom of those 

 ancient ones which they in many cases resemble. We will not here 

 consider whether the plans of late adopted for preserving the lives of 

 sailors are or are not more judicious than that sweeping Scotch measure 

 which, in the middle of the fifteenth century, prohibited vessels from 

 sailing during the winter. For the present, it shall remain an open 

 question whether there is a better warrant for giving the police pow- 

 ers to search certain provision-dealers* premises for unfit food than 

 there was for the law of Edward III, under which innkeepers at sea- 

 ports were sworn to search their guests to prevent the exportation of 

 money or plate. We will assume that there is no less wisdom in that 

 clause of the Canal-boat Act, which forbids an owner to gratuitously 

 board the children of the boatmen, than there was in the Spitalfields 

 Acts, which up to 1824, for the benefit of the aritsans, forbade the 

 manufacturers to fix their factories more than ten miles from the 

 Royal Exchange. 



We exclude, then, these questions of philanthropic motive and wise 

 judgment, taking both of them for granted, and have here to con- 

 cern ourselves solely with the compulsory nature of the measures 

 which, for good or evil, as the case may be, have been put in force 

 during periods of Liberal ascendency. 



To bring the illustrations within compass, let us commence with 

 1860, under the second administration of Lord Palmerston. In that 

 year, the restrictions of the Factory Act were extended to bleaching 

 and dyeing works ; authority was given to provide analysts to be paid 

 out of local rates ; there was an act providing for inspection of gas- 

 works, as well as for fixing quality and limits of price ; there was the 

 act which, in addition to further mine-inspection, made it penal to 

 employ boys under twelve unable to read and write ; and there were 

 further provisions for cheap locomotion on railways. In 1861 oc- 

 curred an extension of the compulsory provisions of the Factory Act 

 to lace-works ; power was given to poor-law guardians, etc., to enforce 

 vaccination ; local boards were authorized to make improvements in 



