"The system which produces the happiest moral effects, will be found most beneficial to the interest of the individual, and to the general weal. Upon this basis the science of political economy will rest at last, when the ponderous volumes by which it has been overlaid, shall have sunk by their own weight into the dead sea of oblivion." — Southey's Essays. Vol. I. pp. 181, 182. "The gentlest method which I know, and at the same time one of the most effectual of the methods, of stopping the progress of vice, is by removing the temptations to it.” — Fielding's" Causes of the Increase of Robbers." Works, Vol. X. p. 351. "It is the misfortune of this country, (England) and it has been the calamity, and may prove the destruction of Ireland, that the ➤ different classes of society have not a sufficient bond and connexion of intercourse." - Sir Thomas Barnard, on the Education of the Poor, p. 60. PRINTED BY ISAAC R. BUTTS. REPORT. To the Executive Committee of the AMERICAN UNITARIAN ASSOCIATION. GENTLEMEN, — The term poverty, as I have used it in my Reports, signifies a dependence upon charity for the means of subsistence. I consider no one, therefore, in the strict sense of the term, as poor, who is not thus dependent; and every one who thus depends on charity, during the time of this dependence, and in the degree of it, is poor. In view of this definition, in my Report of May 5th, 1830, I divided the poor into three classes. 1st, those who are only occasionally, and partially poor. 2d, those who are frequently, and considerably poor. And, 3d, those who are constantly, and absolutely poor. Between these general divisions, I observed, that there are examples of every supposable degree, and kind of poverty; and I brought before you such examples as I could, within the limits I must prescribe to myself, of the character and condition of each of these classes of the poor among us. My only object, however, then was, to expose the injustice of the sentiment which is sometimes formed of the whole of the poor, from the specimens which we see abroad as vagrants, or which come to our our houses for broken food, or which are generally found in alms-houses. But there are other, and not less important classifications to be made of this great department of our fellow beings, if we would think correctly, or act wisely, or justly respecting them. I cannot, however, proceed to the classification which I would now offer, without pausing to bring the consideration distinctly and strongly before my own mind, that I am about to classify, in some respects at least with a view to mere pecuniary calculations respecting the charge of them, not creatures of another and a lower nature than our own, but our equals in natural rights; our fellow immortals; the children, equally with ourselves, of him whom we call " Father in heaven;" and some who are our superiors, it may be, in all which constitutes excellence in the sight of God. I would therefore think of them, in every step of my way, with the respect, and interest, and affection which are due to them, in view of our common origin, our consequent relation to each other, and our common infirmities, exposures, defects, and final accountableness. I would not, indeed, while thinking of our duties in respect to the poor, forget the duties of the poor to themselves, and to society; for it is no part of charity to minister to idleness, and recklessness, and vice. But, in truth, never shall we do anything which will avail much for the remedy, or the prevention of pauperism, or of crime, or even for the relief of the most pressing wants of those who stand most in need of the relief we can give them, till we strongly feel the sentiment of a common nature with them, and are brought to act upon the broad principles at once of christian justice, and of christian humanity. "The condition of man," says Colquhoun, "is susceptible of four material distinctions. First, that of utter inability to procure subsistence. Second, that of inadequate ability. Third, that of adequate ability, and no more. Fourth, that of extra ability, which is the ordinary state of man, and is the source of wealth." * The * 66 Colquhoun has made three classes of the "causes of indigence." The first class he designates, 66 causes of indigence irremediable." The second," remediable indigence, requiring props to raise it to a state of poverty." The third, culpable causes of indigence.". "Poverty," he says, "is that condition of society, where the individual has no surplus labor in store, and, consequently, no property but what is derived from constant industry in the various occupations of life. Or, in other words, it is the state of every one who must labor for subsistence." 66 Indigence," he defines to be "that condition in society, which implies want, misery and distress. It -is the state of any one who is destitute of the means of subsistence." (Treatise on Indigence, pp. 7, 8.) I quote these definitions, because, without them, this classification would hardly be intelligible. I am not satisfied, however, with this distinction between indigence and poverty, or with this definition of poverty. An individual is not poor, and should not be thought to be poor, who by his or her industry, in any of the occupations of life, can and does obtain the means of subsistence. Nor is a family to be considered as poor, the wants of which are met either by its head, or by the united exertions of its members, without appealing to charity. Such a family, or such an individual, by sickness, or other causes, may in a short time be brought to poverty, or to a dependence on charity. And so also may the most affluent individual, or the most affluent family. But as long as any shall actually provide for their own necessities, though compelled to daily labor to make this provision, they are not poor. This distinction between those who can, and do, and those who do not, and cannot provide for their own wants, is, I think, important. There are not a few who lab or very hard for self-support, and who live by their own labors, though indeed sometimes called to painful privations, who 2. |