« AnteriorContinuar »
under government, are prompted by the common nature of man; and none other. In monafteries and nunneries, envy, detraction, and heart-burning, never cease. Sorry I am to obferve, that in feminaries of learning concord and good-will do not always prevail, even among the profeffors. What adds greatly to the difeafe in a poorhoufe, is that the people fhut up there, being fecure of maintenance, are reduced to a ftate of abfolute idlenefs, for it is in vain to think of making them work: they have no care, nothing to keep the blood in motion. Attend to a ftate fo different from what is natural to us. Those who are innocent and harmlefs, will languish, turn difpirited, and tire of life. Those of a bustling and restless temper, will turn four and peevish for want of occupation: they will murmur against their fuperiors, pick quarrels with their neighbours, and fow discord every where. The worst of all is, that a poor-houfe never fails to corrupt the morals of the inhabitants: nothing tends fo much to promote vice and immorality, as idleness among a number of low people collected in one place. Among no fet of people does profligacy more abound,
bound, than among the feamen in Greenwich hospital.
A poor-house tends to corrupt the body no less than the mind. It is a nursery of diseases, fostered by dirtinefs and crouding.
To this scene let us oppofe the condition of those who are fupported in their own houses. They are laid under the neceffity of working with as much affiduity as ever; and as the fum given them in charity is at their own disposal, they are careful to lay it out in the most frugal manner. If by parfimony they can save any finall part, it is their own; and the hope of encreasing this little stock, fupports their spirits and redoubles their industry. They live innocently and comfortably, because they live industriously; and industry, as every one knows, is the chief pleasure of life to those who have acquired the habit of being constantly employ'd.
A Great City confidered in Phyfical, Moral, and Political Views.
N all ages an opinion has been preva
evil lent, that a great city is a great ; and that a capital may be too great for the state, as a head may be for the body, fhallow reaConfidering however the very fons that have been given for this opinion, it should seem to be but flightly founded. There are several ordinances limiting the extent of Paris, and prohibiting new buildings beyond the prefcribed bounds; the first of which is by Henry II. ann. 1549. These ordinances have been renewed from time to time, down to the 1672, in which year there is an edict of Louis XIV. to the fame purpose. The reafons affigned are, "First, That by enlarging the city, the "air would be rendered unwholefome. "Second, That cleaning the ftreets would "prove a great additional labour. Third, "That adding to the number of inhabiદ tants would raife the price of provi"fions,
"fions, of labour, and of manufactures. "Fourth, That ground would be covered "with buildings inftead of corn, which
might hazard a fcarcity. Fifth, That "the country would be depopulated by
the defire that people have to refort to "the capital. And, laftly, That the difficulty of governing fuch numbers, "would be an encouragement to robbery "and murder."
In these reasons, the limiting the extent of the city and the limiting the number of inhabitants are jumbled together, as if they were the fame. The only reasons that regard the former, are the second and fourth; and thefe, at beft, are trifling. The first reafon urged against enlarging the city, is a folid reafon for enlarging it, fuppofing the numbers to be limited; for crouding is an infallible means to render the air unwholesome. Paris, with the fame number of inhabitants that were in the days of the fourth Henry, occupies thrice the space, much to the health as well as comfort of the inhabitants. Had the ordinances mentioned been made effectual, the houses in Paris must all have been built story above ftory, afcending to VOL. III. е
the sky like the tower of Babel. Before the great fire anno 1666, the plague was frequent in London; but by widening the streets and enlarging the houses, there has not fince been known in that great city, any contagious diftemper that deferves the name of a plague. The third, fifth, and last reafons, conclude against permitting any addition to the number of inhabitants; but conclude nothing against enlarging the town. In a word, the meafure adopted in thefe ordinances has little or no tendency to correct the evils complained of; and infallibly would enflame the chief of them. The measure that ought to have been adopted, is to limit the number of inhabitants, not the extent of the town.
Queen Elifabeth of England, copying the French ordinances, iffued a proclamation anno 1602, prohibiting any new buildings within three miles of London. The preamble is in the following words: "That foreseeing the great and manifold "inconveniencies and mifchiefs which "daily grow, and are likely to increase, "in the city and fuburbs of London, by "confluence of people to inhabit the " fame;