those in any other class either of civil, or moral offenders. Of profligacy, says Burns,

"I waive the quantum of the sin,
The hazard of concealing;

But, och! it hardens a' within,
And petrifies the feeling."

And, truly, it does petrify all the best sensibilities of our common nature. It debases man more than any other sin. But it debases woman far more than man. And as the number is large of those, who, by reason of their profligacy, are unable to obtain the means of their support by any honest and honorable employment; and, failing of support by this cause, who have no alternative but to beg, or to steal, or to live on in their sin; the moral well being of the community is deeply concerned in the inquiry, how shall they live? or, what disposition shall be made of them? Many of them, if rescued in an early stage of their transgression, and committed for a few years to the kindly care of faithful and competent teachers, might be saved from falling into poverty, or dependence. But when they cannot be made to earn their subsistence; and this is the case of but too many of them, they are, and must be treated as irremediably poor.

Here, in fine, I would place all those, whose poverty is a consequence of their vices, and whose vices have reduced them to a permanent inability for self-support. There is a poverty, which is immediately attributable to insanity; and, going one step farther back, to vice, the cause of the insanity. There are also sore bodily diseases, which induce a permanent incapacity for labor, in those

who have depended for their support upon their daily earnings, which are most clearly to be attributed to their violations of the laws of God, and of man. It is very questionable, how far any of the individuals of this division should be left at liberty, to live where, and as they will. They are, however, as far as they retain moral faculties, still to be treated as moral beings, and therefore to be brought under the most favorable moral influences. This is not less the dictate of Christian humanity, than it is that they should still be recognised as beings partaking of the physical wants which are inseparable from our common nature. I would not, indeed, that they should be considered as convicts, and their place of confinement as a prison. But I would that we should neither discourage the exertions of the virtuous for selfsupport, by an exercise of charity which shall give it the operation of a bounty upon vice; nor encourage the vicious in their debasement, by showing them that they may safely continue in it, and still look with confidence for equal favor at last, as if they had resolutely maintained their virtue.

In view of this classification of the poor, I think it will be obvious, 1st, that all, in each of the divisions of the first class, that is, that the incurably insane, the idiot, and the deficient in capacity for self-direction and selfsupport, - have as strong and defensible a claim for their support upon those who have the means of aiding and supporting them, as he who has inherited, or has earned property, has by law, and common consent, a claim upon such property. The single fact, that they are poor without any fault of their own, con

sidered in connexion with the acknowledged principle of law, that "the act of God injures no man," establishes their rightful claim to support by others; their absolute right and claim, 1st, upon their near relatives; and 2dly, upon the community, where there are no relatives who may support them. I attach importance to this doctrine, because, if admitted, and in this view of it I think that it hardly admits of dispute,

it settles a great and primary question respecting large numbers of the poor. It places the duty of making a comfortable provision for the irremediably, and innocently poor, upon its true foundation; that of unequivocal right, and justice. I know not, indeed, of a more palpable violation of justice, and of absolute right, in any of the transactions which human laws have declared to be criminal, than is the act of confounding any of these innocent sufferers with criminals, by imprisoning them with criminals. This, however, has been done, and is still done, both in this city, and in other parts of our Com. monwealth. Would that I could make any exposition of this evil, which would excite all in our State and country to demand, till they had obtained, its perfect remedy!

In view also of the second of these classes of the poor, that is, of the deaf and dumb, the blind, the curably insane, children who cannot be provided for by their parents, or near relatives, and all, in fine, who, without any fault on their own part, are necessarily and temporarily poor, I would ask, if their right likewise to the care and support of others, in proportion to, and during the time of their inability, be not as perfect as is the right of those of the first class? They are innocent, as far as respects

their poverty. This is an elementary consideration which is not to be lost sgiht of. If, then, they have no relatives who are able to take the charge of them, or if adequate provision be not made for them by private charity, is not the State, or the Government of the State, bound to stand to them in the relation of a parent, to assume this charge, and to be faithful to the duties implied in it? Here, indeed, is not only implied a limitation of the time during which the individuals of this class may claim the protection and support of society; but, a right also on the part of society, which is quite as absolute as this claim, to avail itself of any capacities which any of these individuals may have for self-support, under the direction of others. Nay, society will have a perfect right, if they shall ever be able to render it, to demand of these individuals a compensation for what it may have done for them. But it cannot rightfully, or innocently, disregard their claims. These claims are as clearly to be inferred from the elementary principles of common law, as they are from those of humanity, and of religion.

In respect to those of the third and fourth classes, the ground of appeal to charity is changed. There are, indeed, rights and claims, which can never be lost. The greatest offender against the laws either of God, or man, may justly claim from his fellow man exemption from suffering, or loss, any further than suffering or loss on his part is essential for the security of the rights of others. If it can be shown of any one, that the forfeit of his life is essential for the security of the lives of others, his life is then justly forfeited, and may be taken. But in no other case may it justly be taken by man. If any one may be so confined, whatever may have been his crime, that no

danger is to be apprehended from him, he has, as far as man is concerned, a perfect right to his life. This, I think, should be an adınitted principle of criminal jurisprudence. There are therefore rights and claims of the vicious, as well as of the virtuous poor. But here, also, are as definable rights and claims of society. If the support of any, by society, is demanded, or becomes necessary, while the individuals claiming it have ability, under the superintendence of others, by any labors to contribute to their own support, the right of society is perfect to claim, and to enforce this labor. Government therefore has the right, and it is its duty, to establish Work-Houses, Houses of Correction, and State Prisons; and to require the labors of the inmates of these institutions for their own support. Let the idle, then, the drunkard, the dishonest, the profligate, and other classes of offenders against the laws, be recognised as enemies of society. Let society provide for its own security by their confinement; and let it demand, as it rightly may, the products that may be obtained from their industry, as a remuneration for the charge of them. But, while it punishes them, let their correction, and not its revenge, be the object of this confinement, and of this punishment; let a just discrimination be made between the classes of offenders; and, let the claims of mere misfortune, and of innocent inability, be acknowledged with a free and generous sympathy. A recognition of these principles, I believe, would do much to lessen the amount of want, and crime, and misery, and to advance the security and happiness of society.

I beg leave, in addition, yet a moment longer, to call your attention to two of the divisions which are here made of the poor. I refer, 1st, to the morally exposed