of the guardians, would it not have been as competent for the Commissioners to issue a regulation to procure such admission, as to procure the appointment of a chaplain?' There is a lawyer craft, a low cunning in this attempt to make out a necessity for the exercise of their assumed prerogative, which reflects no credit upon either the Commissioners or their Secretary. The fact is obvious, that it had been predetermined to force workhouse chaplains upon the rate-payers; and then Mr. Chadwick was set to find legal grounds and canting pretexts to justify the conduct of his masters. The main object aimed at was, to seclude the inmates of the workhouse from all other spiritual aid and oversight, and to exclude all other religious instruction. Thus, in Mr. Chadwick's letter to the clerk to the Braintree Guardians, June 13, 1838, the Commissioners are stated to be prepared to sanction such modifications of the 'workhouse rules, as shall enable the guardians to make arrangements for permitting the children and the aged pau-pers to go to church' (the workhouse rules being, it should seem, opposed to this altogether); but, with regard to ablebodied paupers, 'the Commissioners would not feel justified in permitting any similar modification of the workhouse rules, 'except in respect to widows with families.' The Resolutions of the Braintree Board, in reply to this arrogant communication, are forcible and spirited.

That this Board consider it one of the most important and invaluable privileges of the poor, equally with the rich, to unite with their fellow Christians in the public service of religion at their respective places of worship, whether Episcopalian or Dissenting; and that therefore, however willing to concur in carrying into effect the Poor Law Amendment Act, in other respects, they cannot be parties to any regulations calculated to deprive the inmates of this privilege, which they, as guardians, consider to be their inalienable right.

That all the Episcopalians and Dissenters, inmates of the union house, who are able to attend public worship, are at present, and can henceforward be, accommodated with sittings at the parish church of Braintree, and at the several dissenting meeting houses; and they are regularly accompanied thither by the governor of the workhouse, or by a trustworthy person engaged for the purpose, and who attends them back again after service is ended, so as to ensure a decent and orderly demeanor, and to prevent the possibility of this privilege being abused; and the guardians have the most satisfactory assurance of the clergyman and dissenting ministers, on whose ministrations the inmates respectively attend, that their conduct during divine service is in every respect exemplary and unblameable. Proceedings of Braintree Union, p. 7.

Mr. Secretary Chadwick, in his answer to the Board, intimates, that the Commissioners 'entertain no doubt that it will 'be their duty to issue an order for the appointment of a chap

lain,' if the Guardians do not voluntarily make an arrangement to that effect; but that they wish to ascertain, before they take a final step in the matter, whether the Board of Guardians entertain the erroneous' opinion, that the appointment of a chaplain may interfere with the attendance of paupers at divine worship out of the workhouse, whether at a church or at a dissenting chapel. The Board reply, that they do entertain such opinion; and that their impression is confirmed by Mr. Chadwick's former communication, in which the attendance of able-bodied paupers is prohibited. To the firmness shown by the Braintree Guardians it must be attributed, that the Commissioners, in their next communication, give way so far as to profess themselves desirous that such of the inmates as are able-bodied men, &c., should attend, on Sundays, at their respective churches or chapels.' In reference to this altered determination, the Board of Guardians say :

It was some consolation to the Guardians to learn from the Commissioners, in their letter to them of the 8th of September last, that they had reconsidered their former declaration (above quoted), and stated that they were desirous that able-bodied men or mothers of bastard children should attend on Sundays at their respective churches and chapels;' and further to learn, by the extract from the Commissioners' letter, addressed to some Board, of 11th July, 1838, No. 6779, and accompanying their letter to this Board of the 8th of September, that they (the Commissioners) had made known their desire that all inmates of workhouses, including Dissenters, should' (with such exceptions, &c.) be permitted on Sundays to attend their respective places of religious worship;' inasmuch as the Guardians cannot avoid perceiving that public opinion, or some other powerful and controlling influence over the minds of the Commissioners, had impelled them to retract their former harsh determination, and (though evidently very reluctantly) to extend religious liberty (far beyond what the Commissioners evidently intended) to those of their fellow men whom the law had somewhat placed under their power and control.' -Ib. pp. 18, 19.

The Guardians then proceed to state at length their reasons for persisting in their objection to comply with the order of the Commissioners in appointing a chaplain; reasons so forcible in themselves, and so temperately as well as clearly urged, that, although they appear to have made no impression upon their high-mightinesses of Somerset House, they ought to command consideration from the Legislature.

That this Board object to the appointment of a chaplain to this union house, inasmuch as such an appointment would, in fact, be in the bishop of the diocese, who would have power to prevent any clergyman of the Established Church accepting the office or fulfilling its duties,

by withholding his license and further, because such an officer, when appointed, would not be a responsible officer either to the Commissioners or the guardians, neither of whom would have the power to remove him should he not prove suitable or properly qualified for the situation; the sole control being with the bishop, who could remove him at his pleasure without giving any reason for so doing, even should the Commissioners or guardians remonstrate or desire to retain him in office.

That this Board are of opinion, that the appointment of a chaplain to this union cannot be made without doing violence to the conscientious scruples of dissenting Guardians and of the whole community of Dissenters, including the Society of Friends (whose firm determination to suffer rather than to pay for ecclesiastical purposes needs no comment) in requiring them to concur in the appointment and contribute to the support of a chaplain.

That the appointment would consequently add to the already very heavy and severe pecuniary burden under which the several parishes within this union are now laboring, consequent to the expensive machinery thought by the Commissioners necessary for carrying out the provisions of the Act.

That this Board consider some regard and deference ought to be paid, and is due, from the Commissioners to the feelings of the guardians composing the Board; and that when the peculiar character and circumstances of the Board are considered (there being no less than sixteen Dissenters out of the twenty-two elected guardians), the utmost liberality should be exercised towards them by the Commissioners, in order to continue the cordial co-operation of every member, the assistance of all being necessary to ensure the efficient and satisfactory working of the Poor Law Amendment Act. That they further consider the same regard ought to be had to the religious opinions and feelings of the rate-payers in the parishes forming the union, the great majority of which rate-payers are Dissenters.

That this Board have hitherto paid no regard to the religious sentiments of the paupers applying for relief, but there is every reason to suppose that the appointment of a chaplain would very materially obstruct the operation of the poor law in this union, inasmuch as it would be unreasonable to expect that those who dissent from such appointment would either propose or support any proposition for any pauper, who is not a member of the Established Church, to become an inmate of the house, but that, on the contrary, they would grant outdoor relief in every case where the law should in any possible way allow of it.

That this Board are firmly convinced they cannot appoint a chaplain to this union without exposing the dissenting inmates of the house to all the influence which the Commissioners, in their extract from letter No. 6779 A. 11th July, 1838, so strongly deprecate and argue against, evidently on the behalf of those who adhere to the Established Church; for a chaplain must necessarily have access to all the inmates, and (to quote the Commissioners' own language), 'The first effect which is likely to be produced by the system is to disturb the religious

opinions with which the inmate enters the house, to loosen his adherence to the congregation to which he belonged, and his confidence in the minister which had charge of it, whilst under the influence of this first disturbance, many, who might be but transient inmates of a workhouse, would necessarily quit it; and of those, whose stay was prolonged, few would retain the religious creed with which they entered it.'

The Commissioners in their extract above referred to, state, they 'well know that the situation in which the inmate of a workhouse is placed, not only entitles him to, but absolutely requires that he should, be protected from all liability to interference with his religious belief." And again, No one denies that every Englishinin has a right to attend whatever form of worship he may think fit.'

'On considering the above passages, and the desire of the Comsioners for the appointment of a chaplain, the Board can come to no other conclusion than that the Commissioners do really desire to interfere with the religious liberty of the inmate; for if on entering the house the pauper describe himself of the Established Church, or of some other persuasion, he will, by the rules and regulations, to that effect, laid down by the Commissioners, be forbidden and prevented, the whole time he is an inmate, attending upon any other religious instruction, even should he request, or earnestly desire it.

That this Board are of opinion that wantonly to deprive men in the forlorn and destitute situation of inmates of a workhouse (who may very possibly be confined there for many months, years, or even for life) of any means of moral improvement, or religious consolation and instruction, is harsh and cruel; that it is an assumption of arbitrary power which, this Board conceives, never can have been contemplated by the legislature: and that it is nothing short of persecution, and a practical denial of the declaration and admission made by the Commissioners that every Englishman has a right to attend whatever form of worship he may think fit.' A right, which their forlorn and destitute situation does not extinguish; of which their poverty and age ought not to deprive them; and which, without crime, cannot be denied them.

That the Board are of opinion the power delegated, by the Poor Law Amendment Act, to the Commissioners to appoint paid officers,' is limited to the appointment of such as shall be necessary for carrying the provisions of the Act into execution. And the Board are of opinion that the office of chaplain,' is not at all necessary for superintending or assisting in the administration of the relief or employment of the poor, or otherwise carrying the provisions of the act into execution.' And that this Board is borne out and established in this their opinion, by that of others more competent to judge of the law, and of the power given, and intended to be given, in this matter, by the law to the Commissioners, for the truth of which this Board beg to refer the Commissioners to the Report of the Proceedings of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, on the Poor Law Amendment Act, in August last, page 4, where it appears that the following motion was made and negatived, That should the Board of Guardians

neglect to appoint chaplains to their unions, the Commissioners shall have that power.'

That this Board beg to refer the Commissioners to their resolutions on the subject of the appointment of chaplain, passed by the Board on the 2nd of July last, and for the reasons there set forth, as well as the foregoing reasons, with many others which they might truly advance, this Board are of opinion that there is no necessity, and indeed would be bad policy, and therefore cannot consent, to appoint a chaplain to this union house.'-Ib. pp. 19-22.

It has now become urgently necessary that Parliament should interfere, to amend the law which has allowed to the Commissioners so wide and dangerous a discretion, and has afforded occasion for so mischievous an exercise of arbitrary authority. If the framers of the Poor Law Amendment Act had intended to make the appointment of a chaplain obligatory, surely they would not have attempted to accomplish that object by stratagem? There is not a word in the Act about a chaplain. There is no clause of the Act, there is nothing in the functions of the Commissioners, which calls for the appointment of one. Such a 'paid officer' is not required to carry the Act, or the Law for 'the relief of the poor, into execution,' Of what value is the religious instruction or superintendence which a chaplain can give in the perfunctory discharge of his office? Cannot the children be taught the Church Catechism, if taught it must be, without the intervention of an episcopally ordained priest of the Anglican Church? We know of an excellently conducted union workhouse,* in which, every morning in the week, the Church Prayers and a portion of the Scriptures are read by the schoolmaster. On the Sunday, the few inmates who prefer it attend the dissenting chapels, morning and afternoon; while the great body go to church and hear two sermons. On the Sunday evening, once a fortnight, a dissenting minister preaches in the workhouse; and once a fortnight, the schoolmaster, who is an Episcopalian, conducts the church service. The attendance of adults at these services is optional; that of the children is directed. There is in this workhouse a daily school for the boys, another for the girls, and three industrial schools; one for straw-plaiting, another for tailoring, a third for shoe-making. The schools are inspected on Mondays by the visiting committee, and the scholars of both sexes are interrogated, so as to test their intelligence and improvement. So popular are these institutions, that girls are continually taken out of the workhouse as servants by the most respectable families in the Union. The religious instruction costs the rate-payers nothing, except the salaries to the schoolmaster and mistress. One might have thought that a system which was working so well would at • Royston, Herts.