the premier prize of the show for the lot of eight rams, and also gave him a prize for his ewes. Mr. Stahlschmidt, a native breeder, who had several animals in the exhibition, was evidently very much disappointed, and we think we may also add annoyed that his countrymen should pass over his sheep, and prefer those of a foreign exhibitor. We believe that the German judges acted conscientiously, honestly, and honourably; and, therefore, Mr. Stahlschmidt may comfort himself in his defeat by feeling that he was fairly beaten, and that his countrymen had practical knowledge enough to see it. There were two Shropshire sheep, said to be from Lord Chesham's flock; and for pigs Mr. Duckering, of course, had entries; but, so far as we could learn, he did not take a prize. He may have done so, nevertheless; but this was not made clear to us. There was a display of agricultural implements and several interesting manufactured articles, but we had not time to make a close inspection. THE SHORTHORN SOCIETY OF A meeting of the Council of this Society was held at the Royal Agricultural Society's room, 12, Hanoversquare, on Tuesday, the 1st inst. Present: Lord Skelmersdale, in the chair; Colonel Kingscote, C.B., M.P.; Rev. J. Micklethwait, Rev. T. Staniforth, Mr. Hugh Aylmer, Mr. H. W. Beauford, Mr. T. C. Booth, Mr. F. J. Savile Foljambe, M.P.; Mr. D. M'Intosh, Mr. H. Chandos Pole-Gell, and Mr. Jacob Wilson. The minutes of the Council meeting, held on May 5, were read and confirmed. The following new members were elected : Brown, George, Pidley Heath, Woodhurst, Hunts. Charley, William, Seymour Hill, Dunmurry, Co. Antrim. Dargue, Thomas, Whale Farm, Askham, Penrith. Fitzwilliam, Hon. C. W. Wentworth, Alwalton, Peterborough. Herrick, W. P., Beaumanor Park, Loughborough. Morley, William, Sweet Wells, Stanhope, Durham. Nidd, Clement William, Creeton Manor Farm, Stamford. Savidge, Matthew, Sarsden Lodge Farm, Chipping Norton. Tredegar, Lord, Tredegar Park, Newport, Monmouthshire. GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. EDITING COMMITTEE.-Colonel Kingscote reported that the Commiltee had considered the estimates for printing the forthcoming volume of the "Herd Book," and had provisionally agreed to accept one of them, if after an interview with the firm matters could be brought to a satisfactory conclusion. That several applications had been made as to entering cows having only had bull calves, in cases where the cows had been previously entered, with their produce, in the "Herd Book;" the committee recommended that Mr. Strafford's rule be adhered to, namely, that no cow could be entered a second time, unless she had produced a heifer calf, and that the secretary be instructed to return such entries with the fees. That the committee had considered several applications as to the eligibility of animals for entry in the "Herd Book," and had directed the secretary to apply to the same. This report was received and adopted. The committee brought under the notice of the Council, for their earnest attention, the question of duplicate names of cows in the "Herd Book," and the committee were of opinion that some rule in reference thereto should be laid down. After a discussion on this point, it was referred back to the committee to draw up some suggestions for the consideration of the Council at a future meeting. GENERAL PURPOSES COMMITTEE.-Lord Skelmers dale reported that the committee had examined and passed entries up to May 31 last. That the committee had rethe secretary's petty cash accounts and receipts for ceived the treasurer's report, from which it appeared that the number of members now upon the list is 839; and that the balance in the hands of the bankers was £5,288 1s. 9J. A correspondence with the Board of Trade in reference to the registration of the Society had been laid before the committee, and they recommended that the additional clause required by the Board of Trade be agreed to. The committee further recommend that a meeting of the Council should be held in the Royal Agricultural Society's showyard at Taunton in July, and also that the first general meeting of members of the Society should be convened on the same date. That s Special Council meeting should be held on Saturday, Juue 19th inst., at 11.30 a.m., for the purpose of preparing a report to be submitted to the first general meeting of members, and for the transaction of other business. The committee had examined the draft of the agreement with the Royal Agricultural Society for the use of the second floor of 12, Hanover-square, as offices, and they recommend that it be adopted. The committee recom mend that the sum of £20 be presented to Mr. Haward's clerk, Mr. Miaett, for his services rendered to the Society. The Committee reported that a valuation had been made of certain articles proposed to be purchased of Mr. Jenkins, Secretary of the Royal Agricultural Society, and they recommended that it be agreed, to, and that the secre tary be authorised to procure such other furniture as might be required, in accordance with an estimate laid before the committee. The committee also reported that an arrangement had been made with the Royal Agricultural Society's porter for the cleaning, &c., of the Society's rooms, at a salary of £20 per annum.-This report was received and adopted. The Council resolved that the Council meeting in the showyard at Taunton should be held on Monday, July 12, at 3 p.m., and the general meeting of members at 3 30 p.m. on the same day. CENTRAL CHAMBER The last Council meeting of the Central Chamber prior to the adjournment until November, took place on Tuesday, June 1st, at the Salisbury Hotel, Lord Hampton in the chair. The attendance was small. Mr. PELL, M.P., read the following Report of the Local Taxation Committee: The subjects of Local Taxation and Local Government came again under parliamentary discussion on the 24th ult., on the second reading of the Public Works Loan Acts Amendment Bill. This measure by itself was one of comparatively small interest, but it had been favourably received by your Committee as part of a series of proposals calculated to ease the pressure of local debt. In the resolution, however, with which he opposed this bill, Mr. Fawcett gave expression to dissatisfaction which is shared generally by others, at the want of vigour which the Government has this session exhibited on the question of Local Taxation. A discussion of considerable interest was thus provoked, in which the ministers were urged, from both sides, to more resolute dealing with this matter than they have yet attempted, while a strong preponderance of opinion was manifested, and shared in by Mr. Stansfeld, the late President of the Local Government Board, in favour of the policy of relief by subvention. The priority claime t for financial over administration reform was generally acknowledged, but the attention of the House was, at the same time, very distinctly directed, by the chairman of your Committee, to the anomalies and defects of the existing system of Local Government. The course of the debate made it clear that although on this occasion the House may have declined to reject a Government proposal, by itself inadequate, it was by no means disposed to acquiesce in the indefinite postponement of larger concessions a more thorough reforms however complex and difficult legislation on such matters may be. Your Committee can, at all events, congratulate their supporters on the announce ment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the Government propose to deal with that liability of Imperial funds to bear the cost of administering justice which was asserted in the resolution of Sir Massey Lopes. They are glad to learn that legislation is promised by the President of the Local Government Board in the matter of valuation, assessment, and boundaries. They note also the prominent though tardy adhesion of a former distinguished opponent to many of the arguments they have so long urged as to the unfair and impolitic exemption of personal income from various local liabilities; and they cannot but regard the debate as contributing to correct and improve public opinion, and as a parliamentary acceptance of the principles for which they have long contended. Your Committee meantime continue to watch the interests of ratepayers in the House of Commons. Several of their amendments to the Sale of Food and Drugs Ball have been agreed to; although the forms of the House would not allow of a proposal in the bill for a grant in aid of the cost of analyses. Exception was taken by your Committee to the powers by which, under the Public Libraries Bill, the rate for the construction and extension of free libraries and museums might be doubled. In the Public Health Bill, the chairman of your Committee challenged the continuance of the existing law as to the provision of hospital accommodation for non-paupers, and he successfully resisted the proposal to give new powers to urban authorities to construct public halls; while opposition was also offered to the proposal already reported on by your Committee for the compulsory union of sanitary areas under chief medical officers. The Report of the Select Committee on the Continuance of Turnpike Trusts, now issued, again directs attention to the necessity for speedy and general legislation. It may be hoped that their representations may induce the Government to set on foot with as little delay as possible those schemes of local reorganisation which are so intimately connected with the provision of better areas for road management and a more equitable apportionment of the cost of road maintenance. Returns illustrating more fully than has yet been done the sources of local revenue and the distribution of local expenditure have been obtained, on the motion of the chairman of your Committee. The more useful and correct data which these statements afford do not reach a later date than 1873. They will, however, be followed by more recent figures showing the growth and irregularit es of local finance. Mr. PELL, after moving the adoption of the report, said a melancholy duty was imposed upon him-namely, that of calling the attention of the Council, and especially of those who were most interested in the question of local taxation, to the great loss which they had sustained by the death of one who was an enthusiast on that question, and an authority of the highest order, and to whom not only that Council, but all Europe for his influence extended beyond this countrywas indebted; he need hardly say that he alluded to the late Mr. Dudley Baxter. It was well known that that gentleman sacrificed his life to the pursuit of information on a subject which was outside the limits of his professional calling, and that they had derived great advantage from his studies and writings. Almost to his last day he devoted his leisure to the pursuit of knowledge, desiring to benefit his fellow-creatures by his exertions; and he (Mr. Pell) had felt that he should fail in his duty if he did not call the attention of the Council to the great loss which they had sustained by his decease. Very shortly after Mr. Dudley Baxter's death he took it upon himself to tell his father, who was a personal friend of his, that he was quite sure he was expressing his own feeling, and that of those with whom he was associated, when he said how deeply they sympathised with him in, and how much they regretted, his loss of his son. Mr. DANIEL LONG, in seconding the motion, said he endorsed every word that had fallen from Mr. Pell in reference to Mr. Dudley Baxter, having as one of the first six members of the Local Taxation Committee had had many opportunities of judging of the value of his labours. The CHAIRMAN could not put the motion without saying how entirely he sympathised and concurred in what had been so feelingly said with regard to the death of Mr. Dudley Baxter a loss which they must regret the more from its being premature, and which was a serious matter to the whole country. The motion was then put and carried. The next business on the agenda being " The Administration of the Poor-law: its Cost and Consequences in connection with Out-door Relief in Rural Districts," The SECRETARY stated the substance of the previous proceedings of the Council in relation to the question He said the first resolution in reference to it was passed on the 4th of March, 1873. The Rev. C. W. Everett having read a paper on "The Restriction of Out-door Relief, the Classification of Paupers, Separate Schools, and Industrial Establishments," on the motion of the Rev. W. Bury, it was resolved unanimously, That no material change in the Poor-law is needed until the present local administration of out-door relief can be amended." At the November meeting in the same year, on the motion of Mr. Gardiner, it was resolved, "This Council, having considered the subject of Poor-law relief, classification of inmates of workhouses, separate schools, and industrial establishments, is of opinion that the existing Poor-law regulations of the Local Government Board are sufficient to provide for the wants of the destitute." The Council had not considered the subject since 1873. Mr. STARTIN (Warwickshire) moved "That in the opinion of this Council it is desirable to apply to the whole country the principle which has been found successful in diminishing pauperism in the Metropolis, by distributing the cost of indoor relief over a larger area than a union, while leaving the burden of outdoor relief to be borne as before; and that this object would be best achieved by granting a subvention from the Exchequer of 2s. per head per week for every pauper inmate of a union workhouse, the management of which was certified by a Government inspector to be up to the required standard of efficiency. This would turn the scale in favour of indoor relief; local taxation would be lightened, and economy was nately 10 years ago Parliament lost a very favourable opportunity of dealing with the question of the curtailment of outdoor relief-he alluded to the passing of the Union Chargeability Act, whereby the relief of the poor was thrown upon the union. He believed that, if Parliament in its wisdom had at that period charged indoor relief upon the unions and continued the charge of out-door relief on the parishes, outdoor relief would not have been as excessive as it is now (Hear, hear). He feared that it was too late to take such a course now, as it would be considered retrogressive. A third course was that suggested by Mr. Rathbone, M.P. for Liverpoolnamely, that there should be a Government subvention of 2s. per head for the maintenance of indoor paupers, on the condition of the workhouse being kept up to a standard of efficiency which was satisfactory to a representative of the Government During from 20 to 25 years' experience as a member of two boards of guardians, having to deal with a mixed rural and manufacturing population, he had frequently heard the philanthropic argument that it was not desirable to break up the homes of applicants for relief and to drive persons into the house. He was not prepared to advocate a uniform forcing of applicants into the house; but he was convinced that the argument to which he alluded founded, to a large extent, on mistaken views of economy. The outdoor relief afforded was in many cases mani. festly inadequate to the support of a family, and only enabled the recipients to compete advantageously with indepedent-minded workmen who were above applying for relief. Some of his friends on the board of guardians had frequently spoken of what it would cost to maintain a man and his family in the workhouse, and said it was far better to give them 3s. 6d. or 4s. a week to keep them out. They forgot the deterrent effect which the removal of a family to the house would have in the locality. For his own part he was inclined to support the proposal of Mr. Rathbone, which would, he believed, lead to an improvement in the administration of the law, and at the same time afford substantial assistance to the ratepayer, through reaching to a certain extent the owners of personal property. In conclusion, he would express his gratification at the change of views in reference to local taxation evinced by the hon. member for Hackney in the recent debate in the House of Commons; though had he been in the House of Commons he would, like Mr. Pell, have gone into the lobby in opposition to the motion, because he thought the time for it inopportune. The Government having doue all that was possible under the circumstances, and having promised to do more, he thought it would be impolitic to embarrass them. promoted." He said the administration of the Poor-law was one of the most important questions ever brought before the Central Chamber. It was now generally admitted that the out-door relief of the country was excessive. He dared say many gentlemen present remembered the operation of the old Poor-law previous to 1836. At that time many of the farms of the country went out of cultivation because of the excessive rates. That necessitated the more stringent law which was passed in 1834, the consequence of which was a diminu tion of the average charge from about 8s. per head of the population to 5s. in the course of three years. Then there set in a reaction in favour of the most lavish relief-in favour of outdoor relief as against indoor relief. That went on until a recent period, when the pendulum began to swing in the opposite direction. In 1872 Mr. Hibbert, who was at that period Vice-President of the Local Government Board, speaking on that subject at a meeting at the offices of the Society of Arts, referred to several Unions which he considered to be badly managed, as was proved, he said, by the proportion of outdoor paupers, the average being 15 outdoor paupers to one indoor pauper; and he remarked that it might be taken as a general rule that in unions where relief was administered in that way the demoralisation of the population was excessive, wages were low, and the rate of charge per head of the population was very high. The hon. gentleman contrasted that state of things with the state of things in six other Unions, which he said presented favourable examples of the administration of outdoor relief. Two of these were in large centres of population, one being in the Metropolis and the other in Manchester, while the Union of Hatcham, in Shropshire, was a third. In these the average number of outdoor paupers to indoor paupers was two to one, and the expenditure was relatively very much less than in the other Unions mentioned. The Hatcham Union was in the exceptionally favourable position of having for the chairman of its Board of Guardians the late Sir Baldwin Leighton, through whose influence the proportion of outdoor to indoor relief was within 20 years reduced from eight to one down to about one and a-half to one, while the total cost of poor relief was diminished by 50 per cent. That showed what might be done by a proper administration of the present Poor-law. On the occasion which he had mentioned, Mr. Hibbert observed that that was not merely a ratepayers' question, seeing that where relief was given lavishly the wages of the working classes were exceedingly low in consequence of the competition of paupers with independent labourers; and that was a sufficient answer to the leaders of trades' unions who recommended working men to fight their employers in cases of strikes by coming upon the poor-rates. Experience showed that the tendency of that must be to reduce wages. Now, it was generally admitted that some alteration was wanted-that some new check must be given to the evil to which he alluded. They must either cut out this plague-spot in the British body politic with a a surgical knife, in some such manner as was about to be proposed by Lord Lyttelton in the House of Lords, and by the hon. member for Hackney, in the House of Commons, or they must proceed in a more cautious manner, and by degrees. He cordially concurred in the object of the motions to which he referred; but he feared that public opinion was not yet ripe for a remedy of such a searching character. There were three courses which The Rev. W. BURY (Northamptonshire) considered that might be adopted to bring about a better state of things. Oue the real source of the demoralisation of the poor was the course was to provide for the exercise of some powerful con- giving outdoor relief. It was, indeed, impossible to doubt trol over the boards of guardians. A short time ago an able this when they saw that in prosperous England there auditor in the Midland Counties suggested to him, and he en- was one pauper for every 28 of the population, that in such a tirely concurred in the suggestion, that there should be a paid prosperous county as Northamptonshire there was one pauper Chairman of the Board representing the Government, and for every 19, and that in what were considered model parishes vested with a veto over the expenditure of the guardians, who-villages in the neighbourhood of which there was a landed should simply sit as a council to give him advice; and the same gentleman remarked that, with such an arrangement, he would guarantee that if that were done, there should in the course of one year be a diminution of the charge for the relief to the poor to the extent of 50 per cent. That was a union in which he had taken great interest for many years, and he considered that he had wasted 20 years of his life in endeavouring to combat the false economy of the majority of the guardians. A second course which might be adopted was, to enlarge the area of outdoor relief or to charge outdoor relief on a different area from the present one, following in some measure the principles of the Metropolitan Poor Act. Unfortu Mr. CALDECOTT (Warwickshire), in seconding the resolu tion, said, having witnessed the administration of the Poorlaw in his own locality as long ago as 1818, he recollected a time when the town of Rugby had 1,800 inhabitants, and paid about £1,800 a year for poor relief. His father having introduced the Gilbert Act into Rugby and nine other parishes, the result was that, within a few years, the charge was reduced from £1,800 to £800 a year. He knew a board of guardians who practically never revised the list of permanent recipients of relief, and in their union wages were very low. He believed that the proposal of Mr. Rathbone would, if adopted, lead gradually to a very great reduction of the total expenditure. proprietor, who was at once rich and careful for the interests of all around him-the proportion was one in 12. Two years ago he thought the evil to be contended against was not so much the fault of outdoor relief as of the administration of it; but he stood before them that day a sadder and a wiser man. His experience in a board of guardians had since convinced him that they could never arrive at a better administation of the Poor-law unless the law were in some way altered. It was almost impossible to look for a better administration of the law from boards of guardians as they were at present constituted; and although he moved a strong resolution there on that subject two years ago, he would now move one which was much stronger. Agreeing with Lord Lyttelton on that, subject, he would now move the following amendment to the motion of Mr. Startin: "That it is expedient to revert more nearly to the principles laid down by the Poor-law Commissioners in 1833. with a view to the ultimate abolition of outdoor relief." Of course he did not expect to see outdoor relief done away with all at once, but he thought that Mr. Startin's resolution did not go far enough in that direction. One great source of pauperism was the giving of medical extras, and he wanted to see that evil dealt with. He would also like to see certain pauper parishes gibbeted, so to speak, and the poor themselves made to bear a certain proportion of the burden of the rates. Mr. TURNER (Peterborough), in seconding the amendment, said it was admitted by everyone that the administration of out-door relief was intended by the authors of the new Poorlaw to be exceptional, and the amendment was in accordance with that view. Mr. GRIMMER (Norfolk) was one of those who thought the time had arrived when some steps should be taken to reduce the applications for outdoor relief. In the first place he thought there ought to be some encouragement given, especially in the case of young men, to the cultivation of habits of thrift and self-reliance. He would proceed step by step, believing that a generation would be required to remedy such a chronic evil; and he would have the working classes educated, as it were, into providing for old age and sickness by means of Friend's Societies, and in other ways. The great difficulty with regard to outdoor relief was to ascertain who were really destitute. A short time ago three old men, their ages being from 70 to 74, applied to the Board of his union (Loddon and Clavering) for relief, One of them deliberately declared that neither he nor his wife had a shilling, yet the next week it was discovered that there was plenty of money without any poor relief. He would rather have too much relief given than see any one exposed to risk of death or to want. Mr. BEACH, M.P., while he agreed very much in the sentiments so well expressed by Mr. Bury, he rather preferred the original resolution, because he thought the course suggested by it was the most practical one. In former times, one of the great evils of the Poor-law was that relief went in aid of wages, and that evil at last grew to such a height as to necessitate the establishment of the new Poor-law system. For a long time much benefit resulted from the change; but, at this present time, in many parts of the country, the system was drifting back into the old course, and that evil ought, if possible, to be checked. The Union Chargeability Act had many advantages, but guardians had been more indifferent than they would have been as to whether labourers were recipients of relief because the charge did not rest on their own parish. They were all agreed that outdoor relief should be checked as much as possible; but there was extreme difficulty in laying down a hard-and-fast rule. For instance, if a man had been suddenly struck down by rheumatism or sciatica, so that there were scarcely any means of living for himself or his family, while he had not been totally improvident, should they insist on such a man at once giving up his cottage and going into the workhouse? No doubt the administration of out-door relief offered a great temptation to improvidence, and tended to prevent labouring men from providing against sickness and old age; but if Boards of Guardians were more careful, that temptation would be lessened. Although in theory the relief of the poor ought to be a national charge, yet there were so many objections to the adoption of a system of that kind, that it could not be carried out except by way of votes in aid of local taxation. Mr. LAYTON LOWNDES (Shropshire) said there could be no doubt that the workhouse test was in accordance with the spirit and intention of the new Poor-law, and its having been so largely departed from was owing, in great degree, to members of boards of guardians not having been well instructed in the principles of the new Poor-laws. Indeed, he did not see how they could be so instructed, engaged as they were in their own business, and many of them being selected simply because they were large ratepayers. One great object should be to educate the guardians in the principles of the law they were called upon to administer, and the very first principle that had to be got into their heads was, that it was destitution and not poverty that gave a man a claim to support out of a public fuud. As Chairman of the Board of Guardians of the Union of Madeley, in Shropshire, which adjoined the Hatcham Union, he had found a great want of clearness of view on the last point. The very fact that men had a legal right to relief imposed on guardians the correlative duty of considering what the relief should be. It often happened that when a man applied for relief and was told that he must go into the workhouse, he replied that he would rather die in a ditch, and the guardians, being frightened by what he said, gave him outdoor relief. It should be impressed on Boards of Guardians that, it being destitution and not poverty that gave a legal claim to relief, it was their duty to decide what kind of relief should be given, and that indoor relief should be the rule and outdoor relief the exception. A great deal might be done gradually to improve the system of administration. As chai: . man of a board of guardians he dared not bring the question of principle before the board; but by dealing with the individual cases upon right principles they had reduced the amount given in outdoor relief from £3,000 in 1861 to £1,151 last year, and in a population of about 30,000 they had reduced the number of paupers during the same period from 1,100 to 525. A great deal of good might be done by means of conferences of boards of guardians, and one was to be held in Shrewsbury during the ensuing autumn. Mr. G. TURNER (West Kent) liked the idea of having a paid chairman, because he knew that a great deal of private influence was exercised over Boards of Guardians (" No, no"). He knew that ladies had met the chairman on his way to a meeting and expressed a hope that he would deal kindly with the case of poor Mary Jones or poor John Bennett, and there were few men who might not be influenced by such appeals. He preferred the amendment to the original resolution, because it came closest to the point. Mr. TREADWELL (Bucks) said it had often been found that the amount of out-door relief coincided with the amount of rent paid by the recipient, and there must be something radically wrong in the system when that was the case. He quite agreed with the last speaker as regarded the use of influence, and when that was yielded to there was of course favouritism. He thought that in many instances the appointment of a paid chairman by the Local Government Board would be a step in the right direction. The system of giving medical extras ought in his opinion to be abolished. Mr. PELL, M.P., wished to say a few words explanatory of his reasons for supporting the amendment in preference to the original resolution. He preferred it because it was the strongest and most in accordance with the opinion of some of the greatest men that had ever dealt with that question, in. cluding the late Poor-law Commissioners. He thought Mr. Startin's proposal could hardly produce that effect in the way of inducing the guardians to carry out the law efficiently which that gentleman seemed to expect from it. The boards of guardians as now constituted contained a large element of gentlemen who brought in what he termed charitable doctrines, and were not so much influenced by considerations of expense as by what they thought called for by the interest of the poor and by religion, and the result was that money was given for relief in a way that did mischief both to the poor and to religion. If such gentlemen wished to be charitable let them, he would not say put their hands in their own pockets, but make the best of the endowed charities which surrounded them. Considering the enormous magnitude of those charities throughout England, and considering the vast mass of organised charity, very little was being done by them to check pauperism, while on the other hand great inducements were being offered to persons belonging to the lower orders to become paupers. He was delighted to find that in the remarks made that day no reflections scarcely had been made on the poor themselves. They were not so much to blame in the matter as others, because they had not intelligence or education enough to go to the bottom of the question. The old evil connected with the Poor-law turned very much on the question of settlement. From the earliest times all writers on that subject had condemned the old laws of settlement as cruel and mischievous. They were very much modified and almost gone, but the effects which they produced were not gone. There still clung round the minds of the poor a love for their parish and a desire to remain where they were, and it was that which led so many landlords to pull down cottages and drive people elsewhere. By the Union Chargeability Act an appeal was made to the selfishness of the owners of estates. At the time when it was passed there was a necessity for it; but now, E through the operation of railways, the whole condition of things was changed. One difficulty now was to get people to remain in one place, and there were, he thought, good grounds for asking Parliament to make some modification of the law which would impose upon parishes instead of the union the cost of out-door relief. Whether Parliament would consent to make such a change he knew not, but it was perfectly clear that they could not trust to the effect of what was called a better administration of the law. Maay wealthy men, when spoken to on that subject, said they would rather pay 5 per cent. more in the form of rates than have any trouble in the matter. As Mr. Lowndes had pointed out, guardians generally could not be taught sound, just principles in connection with Poor-law relief, and it was necessary therefore to get them embodied in law. Mr. D. LONG (Gloucestershire) was inclined to support the original resolution, because it tended to the relief of the burden of local taxation. In his county the elections of the guardians were carried on amid a display of colours, as if the whole affair were a great political job, and he believed the ultimate result would be that an applieant for relief would not succeed in obtaining it unless he were a yellow or a blue. Mr. LEIGHTON (Shropshire) thought the original resolution did not go far enough. He would like to see the principle that there should be a local personal payment, in order that the administration of relief might be carried on economically, and the principle of a subvention by means of grants from the Government carried further. In theory, the support of the permanent poor belonged to the whole nation. Why not assert it in practice? Why should not the whole of the indoor maintenance of the poor be under the inspection of, and paid for by, a central authority ? That would be simply a development of the principle of inspection and grants. He would like to see every landlord of an outdoor pauper charged with half the expense of his relief. At present many landlord were very anxious that their tenants should get outdoors relief: they would not be so anxious if they had to pay part of the cost. Mr. STORER, M.P., said that guardians had themselves to blame, in a great degree, for the mal-administration of the law. He belonged to a union-that of Bingham-where outdoor relief had not been carried to such an excess as had been complained of. He thought that by straining the law they would do more harm than good. If the object of the amend ment were carried out, all the aged and infirm poor who were now receiving outdoor relief would have to go to the workhouse, at very great expense to the union, and the size of the houses would have to be doubled. Many of them would starve rather than leave their homes, and there would be an outery in the country for which the lowering of the rates would not compensate. He was anxious that the maintenance of the poor should be recognised as a question of Imperial concern, but he did not wish to see Government subventions given as a premium on the driving of the poor into the workhouse. If they did not mind they would strain the principle of avoiding outdoor relief to an injurious extent. Mr. C.S. READ, M.P., wished to remark, in reference to what had just fallen from Mr. Storer, that practical experience proved that when they diminished outdoor relief they did not sensibly, if at all, increase indoor relief. The returns recently published by the Local Government Board with regard to the Metropolis showed that, notwithstanding very considerable reductions in the outdoor relief, the indoor maintenance remained almost stationary; and he had no doubt that when the poor came to know that outdoor relief would only be granted in very exceptional cases, that would have a direct tendency to make them more thrifty, and to impress on their minds the degradation which they incurred in applying as paupers for relief. Mr. Pell had contended that there should be an improvement of the law, and Mr. Treadwell had said that the Local Government Board ought to lay down sound principles. The law was good enough, and the principles laid down by the Local Government Board were good enough. What was wanted was that they should reform themselves. He had said before in that room, and would now repeat, that, if boards of guardians would leave their Christianity and their philanthropy, and a few of their narrow ideas of humanity, at home, and administer the law on sound principles of political economy, immense good would result to the poor themselves, and there would be a sensible decrease of pauperism. Since he obtained the honour of a seat on the Local Government Board he had been astonished to find that they had had constantly to refuse applications for power to make grants for outdoor relief from country guardians. They had continually had to take that course in reference to applications made under the Agricultural Children's Act. The last time he attended a meeting of a board of guardians there happened to be seven parsons present, and he was the only layman in the room. What could be expected from such a body as that? (laughter). Such gentlemen professed to be kind and considerate and Christian towards the poor; but what did a'l that mean? Why simply that they were strongly in favour of giving outdoor relief. Let him say one word with regard to the working of the Poor-law as regarded outdoor relief in Scotland and in Ireland. Speaking broadly, there was no dif ference between the law in the two countries except as regarded administration. As to Scotland, he could remember that, in years gone by, every poor man seemed to consider it a duty and an honour to keep his aged parents of the poor-rate. Recently outdoor relief had been given with a lavish hand, and the consequence was increased pauperism in that thrifty, well-employed, and well-paid community. Pauperism was sensibly augmented, rates were multiplied, and Scotland had become a poverty-stricken country. In Ireland there had been an unflinching application of the workhouse test, and what was the result there? Pauperism was exceedingly low, and the rates had greatly diminished. Let them not talk about going to the Local Government Board to lay down principles or about asking Parliament to amend the law: they had got the law and the principles, and let them act upon them (Hear, hear). Baron DIMSDALE said the amendment was to the effect that outdoor relief should be prohibited at all times and under all circumstances (" No, no"). He believed that was the case, and in his opinion it would not be practicable to carry it out. He fully admitted that boards of guardians did not perform their duty properly, and having acted as an ex-officio member for 18 years he had come the conclusion that one of the best practical reforms would be to abolish the ex-officio members. The ex-officio element was one of the great evils of the present system; and if all the members were elected some of the best landlords would generally be chosen. As regarded the Local Government Board, he thought there was too much interference from it already, and if there were to be a paid chairman the result would be an end of jobbery. As to the influence of ladies, that was one of those things which everyone holding a public oflice was bound to resist. He should vote for the resolution. He would much rather trust to the growing intelligence and right feeling of boards of guardians in reference to outdoor relief than to the laying down of any general principle which would be liable to be set aside. Mr. T. HORLEY (Warwickshire) said the fact that outdoor relief was inadequate to the object was, in his opinion, one great reason for not giving it. In nine cases ont of ten it was only giveu in aid of wages, and the apparent hardship of refusal would generally be more than compensated by the benefits arising from the consequent cultivation of habits of thrift and self-reliance. No one could desire that all the aged destitute poor should be compelled to remove from their homes to the workhouse; but, on the other hand, it should be recollected that in many parishes there was a great want of cottage accommodation, and that owing to that cause many young men who would be very useful in the parish were driven away. Something was certainly required to do away with the extrava gance which now existed in the administration of outdoor relief; but he thought that if the object of the law were carried out with proper rigour that would to a great extent meet the necessities of the case. The Rev. E. SMYTHIES said Mr. Read appeared to suppose that a large amount of money was swallowed up in clerical benevolence. In his own experience, he had found that the best supporters of economical principles were one or two of his clerical neighbours. Mr. Read said that guardians when they went to a board meeting should leave their Christianity and their philanthropy at home; but he (Mr. Smythies) would venture to remark that they should take their Christianity with them, and leave behind them that false philanthropy which made them so narrow-minded and try and carry out the wise principles of a just and beneficent law. If that had been done the evils now complained of would not have arisen. Outdoor relief as now generally administered was an ill-regulated system of public charity. The truth was that |