kindness, sympathy and charity, or universal love to God and man. And, on the contrary, all those modes of benevolence must be essentially defective, in which the distresses of others are relieved, without the necessary exercise of these virtues.

2. As charity is a religious service, and an important means of cultivating love to God, and as it does this in proportion as all external and inferior motives are withdrawn, it is desirable, also, that, in so far as possible, it be done secretly. The doing of it in this manner removes the motives derived from the love of applause, and leaves us simply those motives which are derived from love to God. Those modes of benevolence which are, in their nature, the farthest removed from human observation, are, cæteris paribus, the most favorable to the cultivation of virtue, ‍and are, therefore, always to be preferred.

Hence, in general, those modes of charity are to be preferred, which most successfully teach the object to relieve himself, and which tend most directly to the moral benefit of both parties. And, on the contrary, those modes of charity are the worst, which are the farthest removed from such tendencies.

These principles may easily be applied to some of the ordinary forms of benevolence.

I. Public provision for the poor by poor laws will be found defective in every respect.

1. It makes a provision for the poor because he is poor. This, as I have said, gives no claim upon charity.

2. It in no manner teaches the man to help himself; but, on the contrary, tends to take from him the natural stimulus for doing so.

3. Hence, its tendency is to multiply paupers, vagrants, and idlers. Such have been its effects, to an appalling degree, in Great Britain; and such, from the nature of the case, must they be every where. It is taking from the industrious a portion of their earnings, and conferring them, without equivalent, upon the idle.

4. It produces no feeling of gratitude towards the benefactor, but the contrary. In those countries where poorrates are the highest, the poor will be found the most

discontented and lawless, and the most inveterate against the rich.

5. It produces no moral intercourse between the parties concerned, but leaves the distribution of bounty to the hand of an official agent. Hence, what is received, is claimed by the poor as a matter of right; and the only feeling elicited is that of displeasure, because it is so little.

6. It produces no feeling of sympathy or of compassion in the rich; but, being extorted by force of law, is viewed as a mere matter of compulsion.

Hence, every principle would decide against poor laws as a means of charity. If, however, the society undertake to control the capital of the individual, and manage it as they will, and by this management make paupers by thousands, I do think they are under obligation to support them. If, however, they insist upon pursuing this course, it would be better that every poor-house should be a work-house; and that the poor-rates should always be given as the wages of some form of labor.

I would not, however, be understood to decide against all public provision for the necessitous. The aged and infirm, the sick, the disabled, and the orphan, in the failure of their relatives, should be relieved, and relieved cheerfully and bountifully, by the public. I only speak of provision for the poor, because they are poor, and do not refer to provision made for other reasons. Where the circumstances of the recipient render him an object of charity, let him be relieved, freely and tenderly. But, if he be not an object of charity, to make public provision for him is inju

rious.

II. Voluntary associations for purposes of charity.

Some of the inconveniences arising from poor-laws are liable to ensue, from the mode of conducting these institutions.

1. They do not make the strongest appeal to the moral feelings of the recipient. Gratitude is much diminished, when we are benefited by a public charity, instead of a private benefactor.

2. This is specially the case, when a charity is funded; and the almoner is merely the official organ of a distribution,

in which he can have but a comparatively trifling personal interest.

3. The moral effect upon the giver is much less than it would be, if he and the recipient were brought immediately into contact. Paying an annual subscription to a charity, has a very different effect from visiting and relieving, with our own hands, the necessities and distresses of the sick and the afflicted.

I by no means, however, say that such associations are not exceedingly valuable. Many kinds of charity cannot well be carried on without them. The comparatively poor are thus enabled to unite in extensive and important works of benevolence. In many cases, the expenditure of capital, necessary for conducting a benevolent enterprise, requires a general effort. I however say, that the rich, who are able to labor personally in the cause of charity, should never leave the most desirable part of the work to be done by others. They should be their own almoners. If they will not do this, why then let them furnish funds to be distributed by others; but let them remember, that they are losing by far the most valuable, that is, they are losing the moral benefit which God intended them to enjoy. God meant every man to be charitable as much as to be prayerful; and he never intended that the one duty, any more than the other, should be done by a deputy. The same principles would lead us to conclude, what, I believe, experience has always shown to be the fact, that a fund for the support of the poor of a town, has always proved a nuisance instead of a benefit. And, in general, as charity is intended to be a means of moral improvement to both parties, and specially to the benefactor, those modes of charity which do not have in view the cultivation of moral excellence, are, in this respect, essentially defective.

sary

SECTION II.

OF UNHAPPINESS FROM INTELLECTUAL CONDITION.

To an intellectual being, in a cultivated state of society, a certain amount of knowledge may be considered a necesof life. If he do not possess it, he is shut out from a vast source of enjoyment; is liable to become the dupe of the designing, and to sink down into mere animal existence. By learning how to read, he is enabled to acquire the whole knowledge which is contained within a language. By writing, he can act where he cannot be personally present; and can, also, benefit others by the communication of his own thoughts. By a knowledge of accounts, he is enabled to be just in his dealings with others, and to be assured that others are just in their dealings with him.

So much as this may be considered necessary; the rest is not so. The duty of thus educating a child, belongs, in the first instance, to the parent. But since, as so much knowledge as this is indispensable to the child's happiness, if the parent be unable to furnish it, the child becomes, in so far, an object of charity. And, as it is for the benefit of the whole society, that every individual should be thus far instructed, it is properly, also, a subject of social regulation. And, hence, provision should be made, at public expense, for the education of those who are unable to procure it.

Nevertheless, this education is a valuable consideration to the receiver; and, hence, our former principle ought not to be departed from. Although the provision for this degree of education be properly made a matter of public enactment, yet every one should contribute to it, in so far as he is able. Unless this be done, he will cease to value it, and it will be merely a premium on idleness. And, hence, I think it will be found that large permanent funds for the purpose of general education, are commonly injurious to the cause of education itself. A small fund, annually appropriated, may be useful to stimulate an unlettered people to exertion; but it is, probably, useful for no other purpose.

A better plan, perhaps, would be to oblige each district to support schools at its own expense. This would produce the greatest possible interest in the subject, and the most thorough supervision of the schools. It is generally believed that the school funds of some of our older states have been injurious to the cause of common education.

In so far, then, as education is necessary to enable us to accomplish the purposes of our existence, and to perform our duties to society, the obligation to make a provision for the universal enjoyment of it, comes within the law of benevolence. Beyond this, it may very properly be left to the arrangements of Divine Providence; that is, every one may be left to acquire as much more as his circumstances will allow. There is no more reason why all men should be educated alike, than why they should all dress alike, or live in equally expensive houses. As civilization advances, and capital accumulates, and labor becomes more productive, it will become possible for every man to acquire more and more intellectual cultivation. In this manner, the condition of all classes is to be improved; and not by the impracticable attempt to render the education of all classes, at any one time, alike.

While I say this, however, I by no means assert that it is not a laudable and excellent charity, to assist, in the acquisition of knowledge, any person who gives promise of peculiar usefulness. Benevolence is frequently exerted, under such circumstances, with the greatest possible benefit, and produces the most gratifying and the most abundant results. There can surely be no more delightful mode of charity, than that which raises from the dust modest and despairing talent, and enables it to bless and adorn society. Yet, on such a subject as this, it is manifest that no general rule can be given. The duty must be determined by the respective condition of the parties. It is, however, proper to add, that aid of this kind should be given with discretion; and never in such a manner as to remove from genius the necessity of depending on itself. The early struggle for independence, is a natural and a salutary discipline for talent. Genius was given, not for the benefit of its possessor, but for the benefit of others. And the sooner its