should have some analysis of these chari- | Charity Commissioners of Lord Brougham, ties; for it is quite impossible that the the Poor Law Commissioners of 1834, and Committee can attain to any clear idea of the Education Commissioners of two or what we are about without such an analysis; three years ago, all condemned them, and and I think that when I have made that spoke of them as doing a greater amount analysis, whatever the Committee may of evil than of good, in the form in which think of the proposal of the Government, they are established. I received to-day a they will say that we are not now inviting deputation-if, indeed, that word is not them to adopt any extreme proposition in inadequate to describe it, whether I conthe lenient compromise we are about to sider its numbers, or the materials of which propose. it was composed; I leave it to others to say what it was-but the Bishop of Londou was a member of that deputation, and its demand was that the exemption which now exists should be continued as it is at present. The predecessor, however, of the Bishop of London was a Poor Law Commissioner in 1834, and in that capacity dealt with the question of these local charities for the poor. As a Commissioner, in 1834. he signed the Report of the Commissioners, and in it these words

"In some cases charitable foundations have a quality of evil peculiar to themselves. The majority of them are distributed among the poor inhabitants of particular parishes or towns. The places intended to be favoured by large charities attract, therefore, an undue proportion of the poorer classes, who, in the hope of trifling benefits to be obtained without labour, often linger on in spots most unfavourable to the exercise of their industry. Poverty is thus not only collected, but created in the very neighbourhood whence the benevolent founders have manifestly expected to make it disappear."

I am going to divide charities, for the purpose of this inquiry, into three classes -the small charities, the middle charities, and the great charities-assuring my hon. Friend that I do this, not for the sake of symmetry, but for practical convenience, and because it will be found that the subject not unnaturally falls into those divisions. In small charities I include the funds of the large charities distributed in very minute amounts, for these fall within the scope of the observations I am now making. The middle charities generally administer relief in money, dealing with stipends of £20, £30, £40, or £50 a year-distributed, for the most part, to decayed gentlefolk, widows and orphans of clergy and Dissenting ministers, and persons generally within these middle regions. The larger charities require separate consideration. But what are we to say of the small charities? Sir, I say without hesitation, that there is scarcely That was the Report of the Commissionone among them-a few there may be, ers in 1834. I need hardly go back to but they are totally insignificant and in- the Report of the Commissioners of 1818; finitesimal-which, if we proposed in their and I do not suppose it will be thought favour a vote of 5s. in this House, would necessary that I should bring before you have that 5s. granted. Do not let me be the Report of the Commissioners in 1861. pressed with the exception. I want to But, considering the astonishment that speak of the bulk of these charities; and seems to be manifested on the other side I say, without hesitation, that if, as a at my stating that the existence of these mass, they deserve the toleration of this minor charities was a doubtful matter, I House, it is the very utmost they do de- trust the Committee will excuse my forserve, and that to bestow upon them atifying myself with authorities to show public endowment is as gross an that in what I say, whether right or of injustice as could well be committed wrong, it is not the offspring of mere inby the Legislature. I ask again, what dividual ipse dixi. In page 519 of the are these small charities? They are, for Report the Commissioners saythe most part, charities for local poor and for local education, and it is with respect to these charities that I say, that if they deserve the toleration of the House-that is to say, if they deserve that perfect freedom shall be given to a man to leave his money to them under whatever circumstances-it is the utmost that they do deserve. That is not my individual opinion alone. Three times have these charities been the subject of inquiry; and the

act

"The hand of living charity is held out only to present need; it promises no periodical alms to indolence and importunity; and if it necessarily somewhat impairs the spirit of independence, it of the founder of an annual dole does not disproduces goodwill and gratitude. The dead hand' tinguish between the year of prosperity among the labouring classes and years of distress; in prosperous years it leads those who are not in need to represent themselves to be so; it holds out annual hopes to improvidence; it more frequently excites jealousy and ill-feeling than goodwill, both on the part of the recipients towards

Scotch say, by something which finds a shorter way to their perceptions and appetencies. I take the effect of these charities upon the tone of the population, because I feel that this justifies me in the assertion I have made, that these small charities, considered in the mass, have no claim whatever to any indulgence or endowment beyond the toleration and protection which are afforded to property in general. I believe there is no city in this country which is richer in these charities than Coventry. Well, was there ever a case of a city where, upon the first arrival of distress, the labouring class were so immediately laid prostrate? Compare the case of Coventry, where these charities abound, with the case of the towns of Lan

paratively few. Distress goes to Coventry, and before it has been there a month the whole country is solicited, and solicited with too good cause, to subscribe for its relief. Distress goes to Lancashire, and remains there for six, nine, or twelve months before any appeal whatever is made to the public at large. Again, an application was made to me from Bristol on behalf of the "valuable charities" of that city; but according to evidence before us those charities are not " valuable." Instead of being valuable the Report of the Commissioners shows that they are pernicious. Mr. Cousins, vestryman of St. Paul's, Bristol, after forty years' experience of these matters, says

I want to put to the Committee the real state of this case. You have a variety of towns particularly, and also certain country parishes, with so-called charities for their poor; and I wish to know upon what ground of justice the parishes which have no such charities for their poor and in England those parishes are numerous, while almost all the parishes in Scotland and Ireland are in that position-cashire, in most of which they are comI wish, I say, to know upon what ground all these parishes which have no such charities for their poor are to be called upon to add money out of their own pockets to enlarge the endowments of those favoured parishes in England? A more extraordinary and clear injustice than that, in my mind, cannot be conceived. I will take another case. An hon. Friend of mine the other night, using language which I confess provoked a smile more than anything else, said that I betrayed my duty as a Member for the University of Oxford because I proposed a tax upon charities, by far the greater portion of which belong to the Church of England-thus propounding the doctrine that I, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, am under an obligation, before proposing a financial measure, to ascertain whether the fiscal incidence of that measure would be favourable or otherwise to the communion to which I belong, and to adopt or reject it accordingly. However, accept ing the challenge of the hon. Gentleman, I will take a class of charities which exist more or less all over the country-I mean charities to be dispensed upon the condition of attendance at church. I have seen the working of these charities. I do not hesitate to say that they form the subject of great grief to many of the best men who have to administer them. They approximate to what I must call a sort of spiritual bribery, operating as an inducement to men to go to church for the sake of receiving temporal alms. It is a fact, of which there is abundant evidence in this book, that most of those who go to church for these purposes are not usually seen there at any time but on the occasions when the spiritual food is to be supplemented, as the

"Small charities of from £1 to £6 pauperize the people; they destroy the sense of shame, and the deserving do not get them. The poor people (he adds) spend more time in looking after such gifts than would suffice to gain the same sums by industry."

And the very same evidence you may hear from the most judicious clergymen and administrators of alms in other parts of the country. The Education Commissioners of 1861 very naturally say—

"These charities, then, by their operation are falsehood to the poor of Bristol, almost as effecteaching indolence, mendicancy, servility, and tually as industry, the love of independence, and veracity can be taught by means of the funds which the State supplies in aid of the Bristol schools." I will trouble the Committee with one more case. I am not about to state that these small charities are generally scandalous. My statement is limited to this :--That they have no claim whatever upon the public purse, and that at the present moment, constituting as they do, as far as I am able to judge, not far short of one-half the annual so-called charities of this country, they

are saddled on the public purse, if that cal- | devised? They desired to have power to culation is correct, to the extent of £125,000 lay out £30.000, or nearly one-third a year. I now take one of the cases which of the whole sum, in the very thing and really deserves to be made known, however the only thing which old Jarvis forbademodest those who are connected with it namely, in building. Those are the premay be. I refer to Jarvis's charity. The posterous conclusions at which we arrive if founder, poor man, could hardly have ex- we refuse to listen to the dictates of sound pected to obtain notoriety through the dis- sense and moderation in these matters. cussion of this House. Mr. Jarvis died in £30,000 is a large sum, and a great deal 1793, and left about £100,000 for the poor might be done with it. They might alof three parishes in Herefordshire, to be most build a university for the West of given in various ways-for physic, clothing, England; and, if not a university, at any food, and so forth; but there was one thing rate a great college. But what they are to which he had a particular aversion-he going to build is a boarding school for the absolutely forbade building. That was ex- children of the labouring population of pressly precluded by the terms of his gift. these three parishes. The real meaning I suppose his idea was to supply the cur- of this is, that the money of old Jarvis, rent wants of the poor. The population supplemented by the money of the State, of these three parishes, at the first census which we improvidently and unjustly take after Jarvis's death, taken in 1801 was from the pockets of the taxpayers for the 860, and in 1851 it was 1,222. What was purpose, has grown to such a height that the reason of this increase of population? the trustees are driven to their wit's end Had employment increased there? No. to know what to do with it; and just as Had trade come there? No. Had was the case with the Donaldson Hospital manufactures been established ? No. at Edinburgh, they have entered into an Were wages higher in these parishes? immense deal of unnecessary building, beNo; they were lower by 2s. a week. cause, like sensible men, they felt that in Were the dwellings good? No; they that way, if it did no good, it would be were the most miserable and scandalous doing little harm. I could very easily enthat disgraced any part of the coun- tertain the Committee with more cases of try. The people went into them naturally this kind-striking and amusing, but, at enough to wait for the doles; for the gifts the same time, on reflection, very painful which by Jarvis's mistake and misguided cases. The Commissioners reported on benevolence were distributed to them pretty the Canterbury charities, and among them nearly doubled the income of the agricul- is one called Lovejoy's charity, part of tural population of those parishes. And, which is to be applied to poor, ancient, and last of all, have the morals of these poor sick people not receiving parochial relief. people improved? The statement of the There were 500 persons receiving relief authorities who have investigated the case from this charity, and as to 113 of these is this-that the morals of these parishes the Commissioners could obtain no inforwere such as they are forbidden to de- mation; but of the remainder there are scribe. And then, Sir, every £11 of Mr. 145, of whom they give the following acJarvis is to have a twelfth pound added to count :-There are 51 persons in good emit by the State, which is to be taken out ployment, not needing relief, 36 paupers, of the pockets of the taxpaying commu- who by the foundation are excluded from nity! A more gross injustice, in my any such aid, 18 occasional paupers, 18 opinion, cannot be imagined. Well, this drunkards, 17 bad characters, four brothelwent on till it became perfectly intolerable, keepers, and one convicted felon. And yet and the public nuisance could no longer be to every £11 distributed by these charities borne, fostered as it was by Parliament, £1 is added by Parliament, taken from and aggravated by the money taken from the honest and laborious community. the contributions of the public. In 1852 These small charities, I say, are not fit an Act of Parliament was procured to subjects for public endowment, and I am place this particular charity on a better convinced, that if they were brought before footing; but a great portion of the evil is Parliament in a proper and constitutional still left in full force and vigour. The way, no one would venture to ask £1 per funds are still limited to the same three cent, nor even 1s. per cent, for a single parishes; but what do the Committee one of them. imagine was the great remedy which the wisdom of the promoters of the measure

Let us come now to the middle charities, which may be said to be distributed in