ftatutes concerning the poor. By thefe ftatutes, certain householders, named by the justices, are, in conjunction with the church-wardens, appointed overseers for the poor; and these overfeers, with confent of two juftices, are empowered to tax the parish in what fums they think proper, for maintaining the poor.

Among a people fo tenacious of liberty as the English are, and fo impatient of oppreffion, is it not furprifing, to find a law, that without ceremony subjects individuals to be taxed at the arbitrary will of men, who feldom either by birth or education deserve that important trust; and without even providing any effectual check against embezzlement? At present, a British parliament would reject with scorn fuch an abfurd plan; and yet, being familiarized to it, they never feriously have attempted a repeal. We have been always on the watch to prevent the fovereign's encroachments, especially with regard to taxes: but as parifh-officers are low perfons who infpire no dread, we fubmit to have our pockets pick'd by them, almost without repining. There is provided, it is true, an appeal to the general feffions

for redreffing inequalities in taxing the parishioners. But it is no effectual remedy: artful overfeers will not over-rate any man fo grofsly as to make it his intereft to complain, confidering that these overseers have the poor's money to defend themfelves with. Nor will the general feffions readily listen to a complaint, that cannot be verified but with much time and trouble. If the appeal have any effect, it makes a ftill greater inequality, by relieving men of figure at the expence of their inferiors; who muft fubmit, having little intereft to obtain redrefs.

The English plan, befide being oppreffive, is grofsly unjuft. If it fhould be reported of fome diftant nation, that the burden of maintaining the idle and profligate, is laid upon the frugal and induftrious, who work hard for a maintenance to themselves; what would one think of fuch a nation? Yet this is literally the case of England. I fay more: the plan is not only oppreffive and unjuft, but miferably defective in the checking of maladminiftration. In fact, great fums are levied beyond what the poor receive: it requires. briguing to be named a church warden:

the

the nomination, in London especially, gives him credit at once; and however meagre at the commencement of his office, he is round and plump before it ends. To wax fat and rich by robbing the poor! Let us turn our eyes from a scene fo horrid *.

Inequality in taxing, and embezzlement of the money levied, which are notorious, poifon the minds of the people; and imprefs them with a notion, that all taxes raised by public authority are ill managed.

These evils are great, and yet are but flight compared with what follow. As the

* In the parish of St George, Hanover Square, a great reform was made fome years ago. Inhabitants of figure, not excepting men of the highest rank, take it in turn to be church-wardens; which has reduced the poor-rates in that parifh to a trifle. But people, after acquiring a name, foon tire of drudging for others. The drudgery will be left to low people as formerly, and the tax will again rife as high in that parith as in others. The poor-rates, in Dr Davenant's time, were about, L. 700,000 yearly. In the year 1764, they amounted to L. 2,200,000. In the year 1773, they amounted to L. 3,000,000, equal to fix fhillings in the pound land tax.

number

number of poor in England, as well as the expence of maintenance, are increafing daily; proprietors of land, in order to be relieved of a burden fo grievous, drive the poor out of the parish, and prevent all perfons from fettling in it who are likely to become a burden: cottages are demolished, and marriage obftructed. Influenced by the prefent evil, they look not forward to depopulation, nor to the downfall of husbandry and manufactures by scarcity of hands. Every parifh is in a state of war with every other parifh, concerning pauper fettlements and removals.

In

The price of labour is generally the fame in the different fhires of Scotland, and in the different parishes. A few exceptions are occafioned by the neighbourhood of a great town, or by fome extensive manufacture that requires many hands. Scotland, the price of labour resembles water, which always levels itself: if high in any one corner, an influx of hands brings it down. The price of labour varies in every parish of England: a labourer who has gain'd a fettlement in a parifh, on which he depends for bread when he inclines to be idle, dares not remove to another

another parish where wages are higher, fearing to be cut out of a fettlement altogether. England is in the fame condition with respect to labour, that France lately was with respect to corn; which, however plentiful in one province, could not be exported to fupply the wants of another. The pernicious effect of the latter with refpect to food, are not more obvious, than of the former with respect to manufac

tures.

English manufactures labour under a ftill greater hardship than inequality of wages. In a country where there is no fund for the poor but what nature provides, the labourer must be fatisfied with fuch wages as are customary: he has no refource; for pity is not moved by idlenefs. In England, the labourers command the market: if not fatisfied with customary wages, they have a tempting refource; which is, to abandon work altogether, and to put themselves on the parish. Labour is much cheaper in France than in England: feveral plaufible reafons have been affigned; but in my judgement, the difference arifes from the poor-laws. In England, every man is entitled to be idle;

because