190 REPORT— 1876. 



is bad, their manufactiu-es are discredited, their people are disheartened. The 

 French are a people of small proprietors and small capitalists ; they have not the 

 great masses of accumulated wealth that we have in this country in the hands of 

 great capitalists. But their wealth is more generally distributed among the people, 

 and in their hands it fructifies at least as much in the end ; if there are not such 

 high profits, there are not such great spendings. Looking to their capacity of 

 bearing taxation, to the general wellbeiug of the people, to the very general pos- 

 session of small ]iroperty, it may well be a question whether, after all and in spite 

 of wars and misfortunes, France is not quite as prosperous a country as our own, 

 and quite as happy a country. 



This at least is certain, that small people working for themselves, if they do not 

 earn more, at least work more zealously and save more than those who work as the 

 hired labourers of others. I am inclined to think that, treating the matter scien- 

 tiUcaUy, the facts will justify us in reducing it to a law that the small man who 

 works for himself is a thrifty man and saves, while the hired labourer is seldom so 

 saving and prudent. Why is this ? I think the explanation is to be found in the 

 habit of forethought and management which is necessarily engendered in the man 

 who, not lidng on daily wages, is bound in some degree to take thought for the 

 morrow, to calculate his ways and means, to husband his resources for a rainy day, 

 to make forecasts of the provision for himself and his family. To this I attribute 

 it that tlie small French proprietor, the Irish farmer, the Indian ryot, the Scotch 

 weaver (who is unhappily passing from us) are or were all saA'ing, thrifty men. 

 Where will you find a tetter class than the old Scotch handloom weaver, the 

 careful, thoughtful, well-educated, independent man, the owner of his own cottage 

 and patch of garden groimd, generally prudent, and alwaj's ready to hold his own 

 in argument ? No doubt modem mechanics make more ; but do ihev accumulate 

 more ? The habit of living upon weekly wages diminishes the necessity for fore- 

 thought. The practice of miyi-ating in search of the best market takes away the 

 desire to own a house and garden. I think it cannot too often be repeated that 

 the great economic question of the day is to reconcile the modern aiTangement of 

 capitalist and workmen with sufficient incentives to prudence and economy ; that 

 is the problem at the bottona of all plnns of cooperation, and of most of the questions 

 connected with Trades' Unions and the like. 



Very intimately connected, too, with this question is the great and most difficult 

 subject of pauperism. Poor Indian ryots manage to get on without Poor Laws 

 because they are prudent self-workers. The poor Irish farmers for the most part 

 do the same. In most European countries there are no poor laws. Yet when the 

 people of a country are reduced to the position of labourers poor laws become a 

 necessity. It is found in practice tliat people living on wages do not make the 

 same provision for themselves and their helpless relations that self-workers do. 

 There has been a strong disposition to meet this tendency by a more severe ad- 

 ministration of the poor laws, by driving poor people into the workhouse. I con- 

 fess that I doubt the efficacy of "this system ; at any rate I think it may be carried 

 too ftir ; and I was glad to hear Mr. Walter of the ' Times ' make a manly stand 

 against it in his place in the House of Commons. 



It is for us to treat the matter scientitically, and to consider the principles on 

 which poor-relief is foimded. The Scotch are a logical people, and they are in- 

 clined to take the view that payments to the poor-rates are a kind of insurance. 

 They pay rates when they are well-to-do, and they think they are well entitled Id 

 pensions' from the rates when they are disabled. Is this view a correct one P or if 

 not, what is the real principle of poor-rates and poor-relief ? I think that these 

 are questions which must be answered by those who would tike a severe view of 

 the relief sj'stem. I am inclined to doubt whether English doctrinaires or central 

 boards can "much improve on our careful and prudent system of out-door relief 

 administered by local bodies who thoroughly knov*^ their own people. 



Even if time permitted I would not venture to deal with great commercial 

 questions in the presence of those who so much better understand them ; but there 

 is one question of pressing importance at the present time to which I must allude, 

 the more as it is much connected with the 'Country of which I have a large per- 

 sonal knowledge, India ; I mean the silver question. He would be a bold man 



