(Gladstone.) Nineteenth Century, November, 1890. (Gibbons.) North American Review, May, 1891. (Potter, Phelps, Chamberlain.) 2. THE FIELD OF PRIVATE CHARITY. It is intermediary as respects the State. It seldom represents mere almsgiving. It deals with the secondary stages of charity. It operates upon.communities through endowments for relieving the public want, or for developing the public resources. It establishes schools, libraries, hospitals, churches. Its legitimate work is in those charities which enrich a community without pauperizing individuals. Or if applied to individuals, it seeks out those who would escape the public eye. 3. THE METHOD OF PRIVATE CHARITY. There are three types: (1.) Scientific charity the study at first hand of social problems. (2.) Sympathetic charity the art of personal helpfulness. (3.) Reformative charity - the work of rescue. TOPIC VI. THE DEFENSES OR BARRIERS AGAINST POVERTY. 1. INHERITANCE. The majority of individuals in prosperous countries find when they arrive at conscious existence that something intervenes between them and poverty. That something is the accumulation in their behalf of those who have gone before them. If properly used, they never know the meaning of poverty. 2. CHARACTER. Character is the poor man's capital. It may assert itself in the use of the stronger physical powers which lead to industry and thrift, or in the use of moral qualities which insure self-restraint and self-denial. Selfdenial reaching to the point of self-preservation is a virtue of which the rich have no knowledge. 3. ORGANIZATION FOR WORK. Here we touch the struggle for existence among the unemployed or irregularly employed. The work of John Burns in connection with the dockers' strike is illustrative of the method of defense against poverty in organized labor. 4. PROVISION FOR THE FUTURE. The creation of a small surplus. This effected through banks for small savings, or through voluntary insurance, or through compulsory insurance coupled with state aid, as in Germany. 5. COOPERATION. The surplus now rises to the dignity of capital, and may take the active form of coöperative stores, loan associations, or productive agen cies. For authorities under this Topic, see Charles Booth, Life and Labor of the People. Woods, English Social Movements. Holyoake, History of Coöperation. Dexter, Cooperative Savings and Loan Association. Dawson, Bismarck and State Socialism; chapter on Insurance of Working Classes. TOPIC VII. THE SOCIALISTIC THEORY OF RELIEF. Two questions are to be asked in estimating the value of this proposed relief. First, What is the Socialistic Theory? Second, How far is it applicable to Pauperism? 1. WHAT IS THE SOCIALISTIC THEORY? Socialism means the substitution of public for private capital. Emphasize capital and the distinction comes out between socialism and communism. Communism substitutes public for private property. Social cares nothing for property which is not capital. Nationalism is the political term for socialism, Collectivism the economic term. Socialism means in detail (1.) The abolition of private capital. (2.) The consequent abolition of the competitive system. (3.) The removal of all the accessories of the present business sysmoney, rents, credit, exchange, wages. tem, (4.) The centralization of power for productive uses. (5.) The regulation of all labor. (6.) The distribution of all products. Socialism does not necessarily mean — (1.) That all private property would be abolished. (2.) That all would receive equally or according to want. (3.) That all private activities would be eliminated. (4.) That social and religious life would be revolutionized. (5.) That individuality would be destroyed. Socialism would effect a tremendous change in everything that goes to make economic life. It would completely and absolutely revolutionize production and distribution, and would regulate consumption. 2. HOW FAR IS THE SOCIALISTIC THEORY APPLICABLE TO PAUPERISM? Pauperism represents four classes: (1.) The vicious and criminal. (2.) The idle and lazy. (3.) The dependent the sick and disabled. (4.) The unemployed. 1. What effect would it have upon vicious pauperism? It would do away presumably with crimes against property. It would not do away with the social vices — drunkenness and licentiousness. 2. What effect would it have upon lazy pauperism? That would depend upon the amount of motive or of violence applied to the individual. It does not follow that a man who is active in crime will expend his energy in work. There is an excitement about crime which is lacking in work. Mr. Bellamy's analogy of the army does not hold entirely. The VOL. XVI. - NO. 96. 42 army does not include all. It appeals to motives drawn from danger rather than from comfort. And it is based altogether upon force. 3. What effect would it have upon dependent pauperism—the sick and disabled? These are now cared for by the State. Possibly socialism would introduce a better relation between the able and the unable in society. Possibly it would take away the refining and sympathetic influences which attend individual charity. 4. What would be its effect upon enforced pauperism upon the unemployed? Here socialism, to the degree in which it is practicable, would effect a complete remedy. The unemployed class would be eliminated from the ranks of pauperism. Certainly the line of poverty would be raised. The only question at this point would be whether this result was gained at too great a cost to society. For authorities on this Topic, see The works of the greater socialists, Lasalle, Marx, Proudhon. Laveleye, The Socialism of To-day. Rae, Contemporary Socialism. Dawson, Bismarck and State Socialism. The Fabian Essays. Webb, Socialism in England. Bellamy, Looking Backward. Gunton, Wealth and Progress. Andover Review, April, 1891 (Miss Dawes). Andover Review, July, 1891 (Miss Scudder). ANDOVER. William Jewett Tucker. NOTES FROM ENGLAND. A FEW weeks ago a remarkably significant event took place in Wales. Bala Theological College was opened with fitting ceremony, and began its work of educating men for the Welsh ministry; it is the first theological college in Britain which has been opened, not only on a distinct unsectarian basis, but by men of different denominations of the Christian church uniting as founders and supporters. It is to give a theological training for the ministry to all who seek admission, and who show that they possess an adequate education in arts. Mansfield College at Oxford is free to all students, and has numbered Methodists, Episcopalians, Baptists, and Presbyterians under its roof, but its founders, its governing body and teaching staff (with very few exceptions) are Congregationalist. The Bala Theological College is professedly as well as actually unsectarian. It is all the more striking that this should be the case in a Welsh institution, as it has been the fashion to point at Wales as the hotbed of all the evils of sectarian difference. Probably this event would have produced more comment if Wales were not at the present time excited with the beginning of what may prove the final struggle for the disestablishment of the Episcopal Church in Wales. This struggle is becoming so keen and strong, in view of the approval, by the leaders as well as by the rank and file of the Liberal party, of the policy of disestablishment. Undoubtedly the great mass of Welshmen desire it, and the Welsh members of Parliament are in the proportion of twelve to one in its favor. On the other side, the Established Church defends the present state of things on the ground that the Established Church is growing in Wales in numbers and popular favor, and also on the second and more reasonable ground, that from a legal and constitutional point of view, the Established Church in England and Wales is one, and that the cry for Welsh disestablishment is a covert attack on the position of the English Church. With the view of making a great demonstration against the disestablishment movement, the annual Church Congress was lately held at Rhyl, and a number of bishops, headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, delivered philippics on the subject. Disestablishment for Wales is, however, already decided upon in the popular mind, and cannot long be without Parliamentary enactment. The "London Punch," whose satire is so often full of reason and truth, and whose political verdict is never given till a perfectly safe judgment is possible, has decided against the bishops in the following lines on the Rhyl Congress : If Cleric Congresses could only care A little less for the mere Church and Steeple, True Charity provokes no Nonconformity. Wales has long claimed to be a nationality, though many have denied it that honor. There have just appeared the first two numbers of a new monthly magazine, which is started to give further expression to the national voice. The "Welsh Review" is starting with good promise, and is likely to succeed; it aims at being popular rather than authoritative, and seems more likely to follow than to form popular opinion. Two recent magazine articles have lately appeared which have been much commented upon, and which show that the democratic voice will make itself heard even in ecclesiastical matters. Mr. W. H. Horwill has been writing "On Theological Degrees for Nonconformists;" he points out the anomaly by which the theological degrees of Oxford and Cambridge (B. D. and D. D.) can only be conferred on clergymen of the Church of England, while the London University cannot confer any theological degrees. This is a real hardship and discouragement to theological scholarship among Nonconformists, and certainly cannot long be maintained. The exception to the rule, that only the clergy can be bachelors or doctors of divinity in Oxford and Cambridge, is in favor of Roman Catholics or clergy of the Greek Church, a curious commentary on the pretended Protestantism of the Church of England. In a more audacious and radical spirit Mr. H. W. Massingham has written an article, which Mr. Gladstone even went out of his way to criticise. Calling attention to the fact that the deaneries and canonries attached to the English cathedrals, and certain other offices, which are only open to Anglican clergymen, are supposed to offer peculiar facilities to men of scholarship and learning, Mr. Massingham points out how very much weaker intellectually is the relative strength of the Anglican clergy to-day than it was a couple of generations ago. The universities used to belong almost exclusively to the clergy, when all the heads of colleges and almost all the professors, tutors, and fellows of colleges were clergymen. Gradually this has changed, and the clergy, though perhaps numbering as many learned and able scholars as ever, are relatively much weaker intellectually than the laity; from this undoubtedly true contention the conclusion is drawn that the deaneries and canonries should be given to laymen of learning who would make the use of them for which they have long been held famous. This proposal cannot be made a practical question until the disestablishment of the church is actually within reach; but when that is the case, it becomes an interesting suggestion for the endowment and advancement of learning. From this discussion another has arisen concerning the masters of our public schools being clergymen. Our great and historic public schools are the training homes of the sons of the upper and middle class of English society; many of them are, like Eton and Harrow, rich corporations as well as of venerable antiquity; they are practically all Church of England institutions; and in some of them only a clergyman is eligible as headmaster. Mr. Gladstone pointed to the distinguished headmasters of public schools, who are clergymen, as evidence that intellect was still strong among the clergy. This gave rise to considerable discussion on the advisability of having clergymen as headmasters, on the conditions imposed in certain schools, where pressure is brought to bear to induce masters to enter holy orders, and on the question as to which public schools were really the most successful and best. All these discussions go to show how strongly the permeation of the spirit of opposition to all privilege is going on in educational and ecclesiastical as well as political affairs. That religion is, in spite of the material and social tendencies of the day, the prime factor in our civilization is a truth which has been receiving fresh corroboration from an unexpected quarter. The talk of the newspapers at that time of year when they are always hard pressed for matter for their columns has been nothing less than the conversion of Mrs. Annie Besant from the principles of Atheism to those of Theosophy. It might seem at first sight a small thing that an impulsive woman should swing over from one extreme of belief to another. But Mrs. Besant is a woman whose family connections have been and are prominent in public and literary life; she herself has been a very popular lecturer in political clubs and secular halls; as a philanthropist and educationalist she has accomplished great things, both in a leading position on the London school board and as an organizer of labor movements among women and unskilled laborers; she has advocated the views of the Neo-Malthusians on the population question in pamphlets, the wide sale of which has brought her in a little income; lastly, she has been a leading figure in several notable trials in the law courts. Now she is giving up all her educational and most of her philanthropic work, and has withdrawn her Malthusian and secularist pamphlets from publication because she has become a convert to Theosophy. She intends devoting her great eloquence and marvelous energies henceforth to the dissemination of the truths of her new religion. This action on the part of Mrs. Besant most undoubtedly means a great attractive power for the Theosophists, and for a time Theosophy will attract considerable attention. HAMPSTEAD, LONDON. Joseph King, Jr. |