to condemn the cruelty, there is no society. Without going the length of this paradox, it may, however, be enough to say that the character of the people has more effect on law than law has on character. A statute-book cumbered with legislation for which society has not been ready is sufficient proof of this statement. Better, therefore, is it slowly to educate the emotions and the reason of the people, than by a sudden pull on their emotions to get them to agree to a law which will for a long time lie dormant. Better is it that men should see their own way through life, than, under even a great man's umbrella, lose both knowledge of their way, and confidence in themselves.

Rather than attempt to decide between arguments so urged, it may be more to the purpose if, out of thirteen years' experience of East London life, I shortly collect what seem to me to be some of the effects on character developed during this period.

The first effect which is manifest is the great increase of humanity in the richer classes. This is shown not only by talk, by drawing-room meetings, and newspaper articles, but by actual service among the poor. The number of those who go about East London to do good is largely increased. The increase is though, I believe, greatest among those philanthropists who aim to apply principles rather than to provide relief. There have always been people of good will ready to give and to teach; there is now an increase in their numbers, but the marked increase is among those who, following Mrs. Nassau Senior, work registry offices, on the principle that friends are the best avenues by which young girls can find places; or, following Miss Octavia Hill, become rent collectors, on the principle that the relation of landlord and tenant may be made conducive to the best good; or, following Miss Nightingale, take up the work of nursing, on the principle that the service of the sick is the highest service; or, following the founders of the Charity Organisation Society, examine into the causes of poverty, on the principle that it is better to prevent than to cure evil; or, following Miss Miranda Hill, give themselves to the entertainment of their neighbours, on the principle that rich and poor have equal powers of enjoying what is good; or, following Edmund Denison, come to live in East London and do the duties of citizens, on the principle that only they who share the neighbourhood really share the life of the poor. In all these cases the increase began more than thirteen years ago, and it is therefore impossible to say that the development of humanity which they represent is due to the cries which have been raised since that time. The cries, though, have not been without influence.

Another effect I notice as generally present, and which seems to be due to the advertisement of evils, is impatience.

The richer classes seeing things that have been hidden, and ignorant that any improvement has been going on, have taken up with readymade schemes. Irritated that the poor should find obstacles to relief in

times of sickness, they, in their hurry, give the pauper a vote, but leave him to get his relief under degrading conditions. Angry that children should be hungry, but too anxious to consider other things than hunger, they start an inadequate system of penny dinners which keeps starvation alive. Stirred by the news of uninhabitable houses, and insanitary areas, and brutal offences, they pass stringent laws and take no steps to see that the laws are administered. Affected by the thought that the majority of the people have neither pleasure-ground, nor space for play, nor water for cleanliness, they raise a chorus of abuse against London government, but do not deny themselves every day the bottle of wine or the useless luxury which would give to Kilburn a park, or to East London a People's Palace. Hearing that the masses are irreligious, means are supported without regard as to what must be the influence on thoughtful men of associating religion with things which are not true, nor honourable, nor lovely, nor of good report.

This impatience is further shown by the falling off of subscriptions to means which offer slow progress. The Beaumont trustees beg in vain for money to build a house for higher education and recreation. A meeting of the University Extension Society supported at the Mansion House by statesmen and orators produced 5l. The Children's Holiday Fund with more efforts this year got in proportion less money than last year, and the old methods which depend on personal influence rather than on sudden action are left to die for lack of the small funds they need. On all sides among persons of goodwill there seems to be the belief that things done for people are more effective than things done with them. A change can be made in circumstances which can be seen, a change in character has to be long waited for. There is an absence of the patience the passionate patience which is content to examine, to serve, to wait, and even to fail, so long as what is done shall be well done.

The same impatience which takes this shape among the richer classes is, I think, to be seen among the poorer classes in a growing animosity against the rich for being rich. Strong words and angry threats have become common. All suffering and much sin are laid at the doors of the rich, and speakers are approved who say that if by any means property could be more equally shared, more happiness and virtue would follow. Schemes, therefore, which offer such means, are welcomed almost without inquiry. The poorer classes, roused by what they hear of the state in which their neighbours live, misled often by what they see, do not inquire into causes of sin and sorrow. Scamps and idlers come forward with cries which get popular support, and the mass of the poor now cherish such a jealous disposition that, were they suddenly to inherit the place of the richer classes, they would inherit their vices also, and make a state of society in no way better than the present.

There may be such a thing as a noble impatience, but the impatience which has lately been added to character of both rich and poor is not such as to make observers sanguine of the social reform which it may accomplish. The old saying is still true, 'He that believeth shall not make haste.'

The other effect on character which has become manifest is one at which I have already hinted. It is a growing disposition among all classes to trust in societies,' whose rules become the authority of the workers and whose extension becomes the aim of their work. Men give all their energies to get recruits for their army, recognition for their clubs, and more room for their operations. 'Societies' seem thus to be very fountains of strength, and the only method of action. Bishops aim to strengthen the Church by speaking of it as a 'society,' and individual ministers try to keep their parishes distinct with a name, an organisation, and an aim which are independent of other parishes. The lovers of emigration have for the same reason grouped themselves in no less than fourteen societies, and it has seemed impossible even to give music to the people without the strength of three large societies.

A society' has indeed taken over many minds the place of a priest, its authority has given the impetus and the aim to action, but it has tended to make those whom it rules weak and bigoted. I see therefore in the members of those societies much of energy, but less of the spirit which is willing to break old bonds and to go on, if need be, in the loneliness of originality, trusting in God. I see much of selfdevotion, but more also of the spirit of competition, more of the selfassertion which yields nothing for the sake of co-operation. If, it has been urged, this disposition is due to the importance lately given to advertising, the effect cannot be good. No permanent social reform can be brought about by a method which tends to make weakness and bigotry.

If now I had to sum up what seems to me to be the effect on character of the method of striving and crying, I should say that the increase of humanity is balanced by increase of impatience, by sacrifice of originality, and by narrowness. Whether there is loss or gain it is impossible to say, but it is possible, considering the end in view, to see how the most may be made of the gain and the least of the loss.

The end to be aimed at is one to be stated in the language either of Isaiah or of the modern politician. We all look for a time when there shall be no more hunger nor thirst, when love will share the strength of the few among the many, and when God shall take away tears from every eye. Or, putting the same end in other words, we all look for a time when the conditions of existence shall be such that it will be possible for every man and woman not only to live a decent human life, but also to enjoy the fulness of life which comes from friendships and from knowledge.

For such an end all are concerned to work. Comparing the things that are with the things that shall be, some may strive and cry, others may work silently, but none can be careless.

6

None can approve a condition of society where the mass of the people remain ignorant even of the language through which come thought, comfort, and inspiration. The majority are deaf and dumb They cannot ask for what their higher nature needs, they cannot hear the word of God without which man cannot live. None can approve a condition of society where, while one is starving, another is drunken, where in one part of a town a man works without pleasure to end his days in the workhouse, while in the other part of the town a man idles his days away and is always as one that is served.' None can look on and think that it always must be that the hardest workers shall not earn enough to secure themselves by cleanliness and by knowledge against those temptations which enter by dirt and ignorance, while many have so much that their wealth makes it almost impossible for them to enter the kingdom of God. A time must come when men shall hunger no more, nor thirst any more, when there shall be no tears which love cannot wipe away, and no pain which knowledge cannot remove. For this end every one who knows the mission of man' must by some means work.

That all may avoid the loss and secure the gain which belong to their various methods, it seems to me that they would be wise to remember two things-(1) that national organisations deserve support rather than party organisations, and (2) that the only test of real progress is to be found in the development of character.

A national organisation is not only more effective on account of its strength and extent, but also on account of its freedom from party spirit. Its members are bound to sit down by the side of many who differ from themselves, and are thus bound to take a wider view of their work. They are all under the control of the same body which controls the nation, and they thus serve only one master. A public library, for instance, which is worked by the municipality, will be more useful than one worked by a society or a company. The books will not be chosen to promulgate the doctrines of a sect so much as to extend knowledge, and its management will not be so arranged as to please any large subscriber so much as to please the people. Instead, therefore, of starting societies, it would be wise for social reformers to throw their strength into national organisations.

The Board of Guardians might thus be made efficient in giving relief. From its funds and with the help of its organisation a much more perfect scheme of emigration could be worked than by private societies whose funds are limited and whose inquiries are incomplete. In the workhouse might be arranged such a system of industrial training as would fit the inmates on their discharge both to take and enjoy labour. It is as much by others' neglect as by their own fault that so many strong men and women drift to these places, unable to earn a

living. They have never been taught to work. The infirmary too, properly organised under doctors and nurses and visited by ladies, might be the school of purity and the home of discipline, in which the fallen might be helped to find strength. The schools from which orphans might be boarded out, and in which, by the service of devoted officers, education could be perfected, might do better work than the schools and orphanages which depend on voluntary offerings and often aim at narrow issues. The guardians, moreover, having the power over out-relief, have in their hands a great instrument for good or evil. Rightly used the power might give to many who are weak a new strength as they realised that refusal implied respect, and that a system of relief which encourages one to bluster and another to cringe cannot be good.

The School Board might in the same way be made to cover the aims of the educationalists. As managers they could bring themselves into close connection with teachers and children. They could show the teachers what is implied in knowledge, introduce books of wider views, and they could visit the children's homes, arrange for their holidays, and see to their pleasures. Much more important is it that the schools under the nation's control should be good than that special schools should be started to achieve certain results. In connection too with the Board, it is possible to have night classes which should be in reality classes in higher education and means both of promoting friendship and gaining knowledge.

Then there are the municipal bodies, the Vestries and Boards of Works, who largely control the conditions which people of goodwill strive to improve. It rests with these bodies to build habitable houses, and to see that those built are habitable, and they are responsible for lighting and cleaning of the streets. It is in their power to open libraries and reading-rooms, to make for every neighbourhood a common drawing-room, to build baths so that cleanliness is no longer impossible, and possibly even to supply music in open spaces. It is by their will that the houses exist in which the young are tempted to their ruin, and it only needs their energy to work a reform at which purity societies vainly strive.

Lastly, there is the national organisation which is the greatest of all, the Church, the society of societies, the body whose object it is to carry out the aim of all societies, to be the centre of charitable effort, to spread among high and low the knowledge of the Highest, to enforce on all the supremacy of duty over pleasure, and to tell everywhere the Gospel which is joy and peace. If the Church fulfilled its object, there would be no need of societies or sects. If the Church fails, it is because it is under the control of clerics; its charity tends thus to become limited to those who follow the clerics, its ideas of duty are affected by its organisation, and it preaches not what it is now taught by the Holy Spirit, but what it has inherited. All this would be