A more difficult question is that of the ideal relation between them and private individuals engaged in works of charity on their own account. The theory of the society seems to be that private individuals should learn more and more to look to it for advice, and employ it to make inquiries, in their dealings with the poor who apply to them for help. No doubt there are many cases so difficult that they can scarcely be wisely dealt with except by the use of such machinery as no private individual can command, and which less experienced observers may thankfully refer to the judgment of the Society's officers. There are other cases which, though not particularly perplexing, may require help of a kind which is beyond the resources of the individual applied to, and these may fairly be handed on to any organisation sufficiently central to have access to a variety of sources of private benevolence. The Charity Organisation Society, and the ministers of various denominations are the natural channels to which in such cases private individuals have recourse. It is much to be desired that there should be so cordial an understanding between these two bodies that an application to the Charity Organisation Society (whose primary object being organisation, is the one of the two which ought logically to open the door to the other) should be sufficient to bring such cases at once under the notice of the proper pastors and their congregations, and to secure their sympathy and co-operation. I fear this is but a distant prospect; yet in some parishes a glimpse may be caught of the advantages to be found in it. But the practice of passing on applicants for assistance to be dealt with by the Society, does not seem to me to be one which it is desirable greatly to encourage. to do justice to the Society, I do not at all suppose that they wish to encourage it, except in special cases. They are indeed continually explaining that they have no wish to supersede, or to check, private

And

benevolence. Their object is to afford assistance in rendering it more discriminating and therefore more effectual. But the drawback to the advantages of all efficient machinery is that it does necessarily tend to supersede hand work, and in some degree, if only temporarily, to paralyse the disposition to bestow much skill and care upon doing perfectly in a few cases what can be done with so much less (proportionate) labour on a large scale. It is, however, useless, and would probably in the long run prove to be folly, to strive against the laboursaving tendencies of our age. Let machinery do its best or its worst, there will always remain abundance of scope for the more delicate and intelligent labour of the human hand. And so, when all that can be done by societies and institutions, and by the organisation of societies and institutions, has been accomplished, there will still be abundance of healing and tending and raising to be done by the purely friendly influence of one human being upon another. The true work of the Charity Organisation Society is not to forestall or to supersede these influences, but to clear the way for them.

The proper division of labour between charitable organisations and charitable individuals is a question of great interest at this moment, while it is in the very act of being (more or less consciously and intelligently) worked

out.

A great part of the value of the Society's work is the degree in which it tends to throw light upon this question. The reports of its committees contain line upon line, and precept upon precept, on this subject. To sift out the " poor law cases from the "cases for private charity," and themselves fill up the unavoidable. but not very wide, gap between these two classes, is in fact the chief part of their practical work, as distinguished from their recording work. No one probably sets greater store by the tenderly adapted influences of personal and unofficial ministrations than do the officers of the Society, thus standing between the two camps-we might almost

say between the living and the deadso great is the contrast between "the House" and "outdoor relief" on the one hand, and private houses, with their overflowing benevolence, on the other.

Whatever else we give up, the Charity Organisation Society would, I am sure, be the first to say let us never do anything which might tend to dry up that healing stream, which flowing out from the richer to the poorer in the form of comfort in sickness, and help and advice in times of difficulty, returns from the poor to the rich not only in blessings, but in such teaching and such heart-stirring examples as are not otherwise accessible to those who have no experience of poverty in their own persons.

The distinction between the work of individuals and that of societies has to be made with reference both to the work and to the people engaged in it. Some cases can best be relieved by individuals and some by societies, while some people can work best as members of an association and others independently. The Charity Organisation Society undertakes to make the distinction with regard to cases of distress, but no Society has yet arisen, nor probably can ever arise, for distributing the workers among the various societies which need their help, and to adjust the respective claims of independent and associated occupation. This choice must be made by each one of us on our own responsibility. The various publications of the Charity Organisation Society, however, afford valuable materials for making the decision. Workers are urgently needed both on the committees themselves and in connection with a variety of associations which they bring before our notice. That large majority of people who can work better under direction than independently may thus find plenty of work cut out for them, and can, if they prefer it, work upon purely unsectarian bases. Those on the other hand who lack either the leisure for regular work for the poor, or the inclination to submit to the degree of routine implied in concerted action,

may render a great service to the Society by allowing one or more of its committees to apply to them on behalf of special cases of such a kind as they may feel able to deal with, either by gifts in money or in kind, or by personal intercourse. And here let me say briefly what I have endeavoured to explain more fully in another place,1 that those ladies who are not much able to leave home, but have a little space to spare in their homes and in their hearts, can do a quite special and most valuable service to the poor, and to those who work among them, by occasionally receiving at their own houses carefullyselected poor persons either for an occasional dinner, or as guests for two or three weeks or a month at a time. If any lady who is willing to try this experiment would make her willingness known to the Society through any of their district committees she would be soon supplied with as many or as few visitors as she wished of the class for whom our convalescent homes are intended, but are far from affording sufficient accommodation. The agents of the Charity Organisation Society, or of the Relief Societies, or the clergy or other regular visitors of the poor in their own homes, might be relied on to see that the poor visitors were sent sufficiently provided with clean clothes, and with properly attested medical certificates as a security against infection, and none but those who have tried it can say how delightful to both hostess and guests is the restorative process which is effected in a very short time by the warmth, good air, and good food (not prepared by their own hands or before their own eyes), the freedom from care and the cheerful welcome and friendly sympathy which can so easily be bestowed in any happy simple household, where mistress and servants are willing to take a little trouble to "entertain strangers." Till we have seriously tried the experiment we have no right to say that our servants would not heartily join us in it. And it is quite a mistake to suppose

1 See an article on "Receiving Strangers," in the Nineteenth Century for January, 1879.

that all convalescents need country air. The change from poor homes in the crowded parts of London to any goodsized house in the comfortable quarters, is quite as great a gain for the poor as a journey to the sea-side is for the rich. In this and in many other ways those who cannot undertake regular work among the poor may strengthen the hands of those who do undertake it, by letting them feel that they have friends and helpers "at their back" to whom they may apply in case of need. Many of the committees sorely feel the want of such helpers, and all would be most thankful for names of residents to whom they might apply for such help as they cannot themselves bestow, but which it is most painful to them to have to refuse altogether. The Society also greatly needs the services of additional working members, especially ladies, on many of their district committees. It is obvious that the whole character of the Society's influence in any district depends upon the volunteers serving on the committee; and if its work does not always come up to the high expectations formed of it, our remedy is to strengthen its hands where they are weak, and to infuse a gentler element where it may be inclined to harshness.

The committees find it necessary in their reports to insist, again and again, not only on the nature of their plan of operations, but on the principles by which they are guided in giving or withholding the help which is asked from them. The first of these is not to assist those who are already receiving parish relief; obviously a necessary part of that endeavour to prevent overlapping, which is the very reason of the Society's existence; although in some cases it joins hands with the guardians with regard to particular cases in order to supply a kind of help which the guardians are not authorised to give; such as money to redeem tools, the cost of removal to other parishes than that to which the poor person belongs, or of emigration to countries other than British colonies, &c., &c.

Another rule is not to give help in providing the ordinary necessaries of life, or rather in providing the neces saries of life under ordinary circumstances. The Society consider that it is the duty of even the poorest to provide these for themselves and their families (including the duty of not having families larger than they can reasonably expect to provide for), and that a permanent society which should undertake in any degree to relieve the poor of this burden would be en couraging idleness and improvidence in the long run, and thus injuring those whom they were trying to help.

Thirdly, they will not give help in hopeless cases, because however unexpected and unavoidable may have been the misfortunes which have destroyed the power of self-maintenance, they consider that such cases properly belong to the province of the Poor Law, and would, as a rule, be best cared for in the workhouse infirmaries. Some of the committees, however, are in the habit of obtaining from other societies, or from private individuals, small pensions for such infirm and aged persons as may by that means be enabled to pass the evening of their lives under the care of relations not able to support them without assistance.

some

And fourthly, all cases are dismissed at once as "undeserving' " in which the applicant can be proved to be of drunken or immoral habits, or to have given wilfully false answers to the inquiries made of them.

The typical cases thus marked out as most suitable for assistance by the Charity Organisation Society are those of temporary distress brought about by sickness or accident, or some such cause, falling upon sober, respectable people, who could not reasonably be expected to provide against such emergencies. When it is believed that suitable assistance will set such people upon their feet again, and save them from being dragged down by misfortune into pauperism or dependence upon others, the Society assure that they spare neither money nor

us

toil in the endeavour to do so. Sometimes a timely gift or loan will be enough; and it is worth while to remark that, with scarcely an exception, all the committees speak most strongly in favour of the system of small loans, granted without interest on the security of some respectable person as nearly as possible of the borrower's own class, to be repaid by weekly instalments of one shilling in the pound. These loans. are almost invariably repaid, as the Society make it well understood that the sureties will be strictly held to their obligation, and the poor naturally feel much more strongly their responsibility towards sureties in circumstances like their own than towards those who, as it seems to them, could so much better afford to lose the money. When money is granted, either as a loan or a gift, the Society attach great importance to the principle of giving liberally, if possible enough to float the persons helped, not mere doles which will need to be repeated again and again.

In some cases money is not the whole, nor even the most important part, of the assistance given. Advice and information, and the power of ascertaining and vouching for the respectability of candidates for employment, may obviously in many cases be of great service, and in giving help of this kind a widely spread society, with a uniform system and a central office, has manifest and great advant

ages.

Such is the outline of the objects imed at by the Charity Organisation Society; the machinery by which it is accomplished scarcely needs description. It consists of a committee (meeting weekly) for each poor-law district, the honorary secretaries of which give daily attendance for a certain number of hours at the district office to receive applications from the poor or those interested in helping them. The honorary secretary conducts a certain preliminary examination, more or less according to a fixed routine, one part of which

consists in requiring from applicants for help, not only references, but a short sketch of their previous history; this process naturally makes impostors liable to much more easy and certain detection than a reference to people who may be acquainted only with a part of their career. The case is afterwards investigated on the spot by a paid agent, and all inquiries from previous employers and other referees are made by the honorary secretary; the results to be laid before the committee at their next weekly meeting. The committee then decide upon the steps to be taken, the execution of which is entrusted to one of themselves, to the honorary secretaries, or to the paid agent, as circumstances may require. At the office are kept records of all cases investigated, and reports of all the charitable societies in the district, with any other papers or books bearing upon the interests of the poor which may be thought useful. These records and other stores of information are placed freely at the service of any inquirers, to whom also, advice in cases of difficulty is willingly given by the honorary secretaries.

are

association as the Society we describing is a very powerful influence, especially as it is by many people regarded as a sort of embodiment of all the most approved theories and enlightened views of our day upon all subjects connected with charity. The effect of its theories and example upon our thoughts and feelings about the poor is already very marked, and will no doubt become more so in proportion as it succeeds in its endeavour to bind together the scattered branches of our various agencies of relief into one organised system. It is therefore a very im

portant question how far the principles upon which it proceeds are the true and right principles upon which the poor should be dealt with by their richer brethren.

A great deal of the antagonism and coldness of which so many of these reports complain, arises, I think, from a misapprehension of the place and scope of the work undertaken by the Society. The common and obvious complaint against it is that it is harsh and severe in its operations, and in the restrictions which by its example it tends to impose upon the benevolence of the rich. I do not think this complaint is quite a just one as regards the Society; nor do I believe that it quite fully expresses the real feeling of those who make it. I think it is really prompted by a doubt, sometimes only half-consciously entertained, whether, the principles of the Charity Organisation Society, and the state of things which it aims at bring ing about, may not be in the long run incompatible with more specially Christian principles and aims. Under a good deal of dissatisfaction with the Society there lurks a doubt whether "Charity Organisation" is in reality a part, though not the highest part, of Christian service; or whether it is not in fact a logical outcome of the unbelief and secularism of the day. Of course there are those to whom this last hypothesis, would involve no conclusions unfavourable to the Society, but I cannot treat the question from that point of view.

The Christian ideal, we all feel, is an outpouring of love upon the just and the unjust. It aims at nothing less than to be "perfect, even as our Father which is in heaven is perfect." As He makes His sun to shine upon the just and the unjust, and sends rain upon the unthankful and the evil, so Christian charity would make no distinction of persons; or, if any distinction is made, it is in favour of those whose need is the greatest. It rejoices above all things in the restoration of the erring, leaving the ninetyand-nine to go after that which is lost,

forgiving until seventy-times-seven, and blessing those who despitefully use it. It would fain have all things in common, and values its command of money only as a stewardship through which it may speak an unmistakable language of love which will reach the heart. It is the working of a principle which fills with spiritual meaning the simplest act of kindness, as the cup of cold water given in the name of a disciple, is a brotherly offering of love to the children of our common Father.

Hearts fed upon such visions as these must needs feel a chill in turning to a system which aims, or seems to aim, above all things, at train, ing every man to do without assistance, and in the first place to do the best he can for himself; which calmly rejects the "undeserving," and omits all reference to the restoration of the erring, unless the path into which they are straying be that of pauperism, and their fault a tendency. to lean too much upon our help.

But it is obviously unjust to com pare a part with the whole, the work of the hand or the foot with the work of the body. The Charity Organisa tion Society have marked out for themselves very distinctly one special aim in their dealings with the poor. It is so to apply the money at their command as to make it tend most effectually to lessen poverty in the long run. The even-handed distribu tion of public alms, subject to the general maxim, "he that will not work, neither let him eat," is by no means inconsistent with the purest spirit of Christian love. If we do bestow any of our substance to feed the poor, we are bound to see that it is bestowed well and wisely; and we may even be justified at times in postponing objects of deeper importance to the pressing urgency of physical needs.

put preaching before relief in order of time would be as great a mistake as to put relief before preaching in order of importance.

The danger is lest the central and eminent position occupied by the Society should lead us to look upon