SECTION III. Of a total, but gradual, Repeal of the Law of Relief; and first, of schemes for withholding the benefit of the Law from future claimants. There are two modes, independent of the pecuniary limitation, in which it may be possible gradually to abolish the Poor Laws; we may extinguish, by a succession of modifications, the Law of Relief, or we may withdraw the benefit of the law from the People, after a specified period, or according to a certain classification. A project, founded upon the latter principle, has been long before the public. It has been proposed, that after a short notice, no parochial assistance should at any time, or under any circumstances be afforded to the offspring of marriages thereafter to be contracted, or to illegitimates thereafter born. This plan is in principle much more just and equitable than the pecuniary maximum. Proceeding upon the conviction, that the poor have no right to relief, and that the grant of it upon the system of our Poor Laws, is, ultimately, injurious to the whole Society, and most of all to the poor themselves; it finally and completely repeals those laws. Nevertheless, favourably regarding, without nicely weighing their reason+ ableness or legality, the expectations of the existing generation, to the relief to which they have been long habituated; and even liberally considering the claims of those who may have been brought into existence under similar expectations, it exempts all such from the operation of the repeal. Such is the course in which nearly all modern reforms have proceeded, and which has been repeatedly recognised by Parliament. This is the proposition of Mr. Malthus*, and it is extremely important to be noted, that an assent to it by no means requires a concurrence in all the opinions of that eminent writer, or even in the view which he takes of the subject of population: It is the first and obvious result of a conviction of the impolicy of the Poor Laws, whether produced by an examination into their theory, or by an observation of their moral or political effects. The proposition does not necessarily touch the question of discouraging or promoting early marriage; its adoption would leave that question as it stands in other parts of the world, and in England too amongst other orders of society, to be decided at each man's pleasure, upon a consideration of what is best and safest, without interference of any sort on the part of the State. I put the matter thus, because I think that the degree in which the discouragement of marriage is contained in the proposition, or is an essential inducement to its adoption, has been greatly exaggerated, and Mr. Malthus's view of that subject misconceived and misrepresented. But although if the evil effects of the Poor Laws be assumed, their abolition in the mode proposed is * II. p. 396. strictly equitable, it must be admitted to be a strong measure, effecting a great change in the Constitution of our Society. A mere opinion of the original impolicy or present inconvenience of the Poor Laws, does not necessarily lead to their abolition, even by gradual means; still less will it require our assent to a proposition by which, (with a reservation only of existing claims) the whole code is annulled; the reasons must undoubtedly be forcible, and our confidence in them firm, that will induce us at once to withdraw all systematic and public relief from the aged, the sick, and the helpless, the widow and the orphan, the oppressed and the unfortunate, as well as from the improvident and the vicious. We might fairly doubt the expediency of so decisive a measure, even if we had less reason than I think I have given, for believing that the dangers of our present system are over-rated. Let it however be granted, that the establisment of a more wholesome order of things in supercession of the Poor Laws, is not only desirable but feasible; it must be well considered whether the transition, which no man can affirm to be simple or easy, will by the proposed scheme be most beneficially and safely managed. The best mode seems obviously to be that by which we shall familiarize both rich and poor to the new condition of society. We may be assured that the simple abolition of the Poor Laws will not accomplish our objects. Of this truth, Mr. Malthus has aptly reminded us*; and although the majority of * II. 406. great authorities concur in reprobating the whole code, I conceive not only that there are many respectable opinions in favor of continuing parts of the Law of Relief; but that the systematic opposers of the whole do not deem every instance of its application equally pregnant with danger. Can we hope then, that labour and wages will so completely adjust themselves, and the people be so nicely proportioned to the soil and wealth of the country, as to confine want and misery to the profligate only? Or, if we are not sanguine enough for this, are we prepared to leave wholly to private benevolence the relief of unforeseen and undeserved mis fortune? All these considerations seem to point against that simultaneous repeal of the whole code which Mr. Malthus has proposed. A more measured operation indeed seems not more just towards the governed in withdrawing the facilities of maintenance now afforded to them, than necessary for enabling the Governors to form an accurate judgment, of the best means of securing a population, adequate to all the wants of the country, and supported by its own exertion. Political economy may teach us, that all these matters will adjust themselves; but that philosopher is surely not too sceptical or diffident, who desires that the process of adjustment may be slow enough to admit of his inspection in each stage and period. The plan of Mr. Malthus must not be confounded with a proposition for withholding from those parents who shall have married improvidently, assistance towards the support of their children. It would * Davison, 93-5. take effect upon those children at every period of their lives. Parochial assistance would continue, with respect to all who are, under the existing system, deemed objects of relief, and it would be extended to the future offspring of the now married poor; that is, to the parents while the offspring is young, and afterwards to those children themselves when adult, if suffering want from any other cause (I presume) than the size of their families. A complete generation must pass away, before the Poor Laws are superseded; in the mean time, two races of men will be growing up together, the one entitled to parish pay, the other entirely debarred from it. Inasmuch as this distinction operates upon those men, now in being, who after clear and sufficient notice, become fathers of children whom they have no means of supporting it may be justified upon the same principles, of general utility, by which we vindicate discrimination of any kind among the objects of relief. Although it may happen that the days of the innocent children may be shortened by disease or want, that lamentable result may be regarded as the unavoidable consequence of leaving the Laws of Nature to their unopposed operation. Without the hazard of such melancholy occurrences, no plan of amendment can be extensive and effectual. But surely we are bound to make the passage as easy as possible to each individual, from a state of legal reliance to one of utter abandonment; and most of all, to take care that the rigour of our new laws shall first visit those, who have most clearly and wilfully sinned against them. A fearful distinction, between the two classes will occur, when the vicious improvidence of the parent |