bourhood by way of illustration. I shall call the parishes A. and B. In the parish of A., the great tithes are taken in kind by the lessee of the impropriator. The labour rate is formed upon the assessment for the relief of the poor. The great tithes are rated one-fourth of the rent of the land, and the allotment of able-bodied labourers to the titheowner is thirty-five. These he is required to employ, or to pay to the overseer of the poor nine shillings for each labourer per week. Now, as tithe-owner, he cannot possibly find employment for ten labourers; he has, therefore, to pay upwards of 6007. per annum as a new burthen on the tithes, in addition to one-fourth part of the rates towards the relief of the poor.

The case of parish B. requires a little more detail, and will more completely develope the working of the 2 and 3 William IV. In this parish, the tithes belong to a layman. A parish vestry was duly summoned, and thirty-two rate payers, being a majority of three-fourths, assembled. This vestry drew up rules for the appointment of all the labourers in the parish,-and fixed the number which each person was to take according to his assessment towards the relief of the poor. Ten shillings and four-pence half-penny for every 207, of such assessment was to be expended weekly, either by employing labourers to that amount, or by payment of that sum to the overseers of the poor, to be applied to the parish funds. Having completed the rules for this labour rate, the vestry added the names of the occupiers in the parish who were to be subjected to its operation, and exempted nineteen of the thirty-two persons constituting the vestry from any share of the burthen imposed on the other occupiers by their rules and agreement. These persons would doubtless sign their names and affix their marks most willingly, and cry up the labour rate as a capital invention. This labour rate was then taken to a petty sessions to be approved. The tithe-owner and another occupier also attended, and protested against its allowance, chiefly upon the ground of the gross inequality of the assessment on which the labour rate was founded, and the grievous injustice which would be effected by its operation. The inequality was admitted by the labour rate party. But notwithstanding the admission, and the mode of getting the vestry, by the signatures of nineteen who were released by a rule of their own framing from the operation of the rate, the Justices approved by affixing their signa

tures.

The tithe-owner was assessed at 3s. 6d. per acre for the great tithes only, and the land at 10s. per acre. The sum in which he was assessed was 3107., and the amount of his labour rate 4497.!! He determined to resist, and refused to employ the labourers allotted to him, and declined also to pay the penalty affixed in the rules for the non-employment of his portion. The parish took the opinion of an eminent lawyer, and found, to their no small mortification, that the Act was defective, and that they could not enforce the rules which they had so cunningly prepared. I do hope, Sir, that a labour rate so founded, so got up, and so hastily approved, has not disgraced any other parish in the kingdom. But it fearfully illustrates what may be

done. And, as it is highly probable that the Legislature may be petitioned to amend the 2 and 3 William IV., by inserting a compulsory clause, I will make an observation on that part of the Act which requires three-fourths of the rate payers-not in value, but in number— to be consenting to bind the remainder. From the wording of the second section, it is by no means clear whether the majority is to consist of three-fourths of all the rate payers in the parish, or a majority of the three-fourths of them. But suppose the majority to be threefourths of the whole, a very serious objection lies against it. In most agricultural parishes, small tradesmen and labouring cottagers constitute more than three-fourths of the rate payers. Now surely the Legislature never intended that these classes should frame the rules of a labour rate for their own benefit, and to bind their own masters and employers!! I have lived long in an agricultural district, and for many years been actively engaged as a magistrate, and I am duly sensible of the importance of finding employment for the whole of our labouring population; but I cannot consent to do this by injusticeby inverting the order of society-by allowing the labourer to legislate for his master. If a labour rate, as a temporary expedient, must be resorted to, let it be based upon an honest principle, and let those who are to bear the burthen have their fair proportion of weight in framing the rules. In many Acts of Parliament, where a certain proportion of votes is required to legalize the proceedings of the vestry, the value of property is considered as well as the number of votes. In Gilbert's Act, in Acts of Inclosure in the 1 and 2 William IV., "for the Relief and Employment of the Poor, &c." this is the case. Why, then, should the rule be departed from in the 2 and 3 of William IV. c. 64? It is very true that a person who is rated at 1757. per annum has six votes; but then, seven of his labourers living upon his property can out-vote him by this Labour Rate Act;—and, by the assistance of their fellowlabourers, can frame rules and regulate the penalties which their master and the other occupiers must submit to. This surely needs correction. I would also submit that, in common fairness, no man should be allowed to vote at a vestry meeting for a labour rate unless he is to be a sharer in the burthen which it will impose on the other rate payers in the parish. Having already trespassed too much on your pages, I will only add, that no equitable labour rate can be founded upon the assessment to the relief of the poor. In that assessment, pastures, gentlemen's houses, and tithes, are rated higher in proportion than arable lands, because of their comparative exemption from the outgoing of labour. With regard to tithes, I firmly believe that the wit of man could not have devised a more ingenious method of reducing them to one-third of their present value, than the labour rate under that Act of Parliament which has been the subject of my discussion. I have the honour to be, &c., &c.,

A. Y. Z.

LABOUR RATE.

To the Editor of the British Magazine.

MR. EDITOR, Will you allow me to add a few observations to the sensible letter of "X." on the subject of labour-rates, inserted in your number for April?

His remarks appear to me very judicious, on including only the supernumerary hands under this rate. In no respect is this of more importance (as he shews) than as it affects the tithe-holder, especially where (as in my case) he does not take any of the tithe in kind.

Tithe being a tenth of the produce when severed, I contend that the tithe-holder has nothing whatever to do with the ordinary labour of cultivating the land. It is not that I and farmer B. are joint cultivators of his farm; but he, alone, is to cultivate the soil, and to sever the produce; and when it is severed, then I am to take the tenth of it. Supposing, therefore, that the parish contained no more hands than are required for the ordinary cultivation of the farms, no part of the burthen ought to be laid upon me as tithe-holder. But if, as is too often the case, the number of labourers exceeds the regular demand of the farmer, and becomes a burthen on the parish; then, if a labourrate be agreed to for the employment of these hands, the tithe-holder is, I conceive, bound to bear his proportion under it; because, were there no such labour-rate, they would become chargeable to the Poor rate, to which the tithe-holder is assessed. And it is not fair that he should be relieved from a burthen, which would otherwise fall upon him, at the farmer's expence.

In my own parish, the labour-rate has been made according to the rental, each rate-payer (excepting the tithe-holder, and persons rated under 157.) being required first to employ one labourer regularly for every 307. of his rental.

The labourers not employed under this arrangement are deemed supernumerary hands; and for the employment of these the labourrate is imposed on all, tithe-holder included, (except, indeed, cottagers rated under 47.,) to be paid, or worked out, at the option of the parties.

I do not think this system so good as that proposed by your Correspondent X., as it does not make the proper distinction between arable and pasture or wood-land. And besides, I think one man only to every 301. rental too little for the proper cultivation of the soil; but of this your readers, of course, cannot judge, as it depends upon the proportion of this rental to the real value. But something was to be done; and where we cannot have all we wish, we must be content to adopt, for the time, what we can get all parties to agree to.

I think, however, the principle in regard to the tithes is rightly established in it-namely, that I am chargeable only for my share of the extra or supernumerary hands. But this makes it very important to ascertain what number of hands is fairly required for the ordinary cultivation of the land; and, if possible, to have them so regularly employed, before recourse is had to poor or labour rate.

In order to make the labourers anxious to get and retain a regular VOL. III.-May, 1833.

4 c

seat of work, and to prevent their feeling that they must be provided for alike, without regard to their conduct, we adopted this rule—viz. that, whereas able-bodied men, employed as regular hands, received two shillings and twopence per day, two shillings only should be paid to them, if employed under the labour-rate, unless their employer found them deserving of the additional two-pence.

We also allotted a portion of the men to the road surveyor.

We have, as yet, had but short experience of this system; but I venture to lay it before you, as it may elicit further information on a matter of considerable importance to the clergy.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

H. R. M.

WEEKLY LECTURES.

To the Editor of the British Magazine.

SIR,-The important subject proposed by your correspondent, W. G., is one which has a good deal occupied my thoughts, and attracted my observation; and, as you express your desire to see it discussed, I have been led to throw these few remarks together; in doing so, your inculcation of brevity has not been forgotten.

Your correspondent has couched his letter in the form of an inquiry, but it is an inquiry which, in very intelligible language," hesitates dislike" to the practice concerning which he seeks for information. His objections to cottage readings are, 1st, that they are "an uncanonical service." 2ndly, that they savour of an undue conformity to the practice of dissenters, whom they consequently attract. 3dly, that they are substituted by the poor for the public worship of the church on the Lord's day. It would be a difficult task for ingenuity to discover any other objections to the practice, and a very few words, I trust, will suffice to shew that these are not valid.

Your correspondent admits that an explanation of God's word to the adult members of our congregations in the week is absolutely needful. Upon this common ground we may meet; for I am firmly convinced that our Sunday services and pulpit addresses, however faithfully, zealously, and ably performed, are, singly and by themselves, utterly incapable of diffusing amongst our people a sufficient portion of sound religious knowledge. Feelings of good may in this way be raised, a hovering tendency towards religion excited in their minds; but if they are to be kept alive to spiritual things throughout the week, if their understandings are to be imbued with scriptural knowledge, continual weekly instruction must be added to the public services of the Sunday. Let any one of us consider what the effect upon his own mind would be, were all the weekly studies of a religious nature, wherewith his spiritual knowledge is increased and his spiritual affections renewed, to be suddenly withdrawn; and yet this condition is superior to that in which the majority of our uninstructed people are placed who are supplied merely with the public ministra

tions of the House of God. For their ignorance of the subject matter of our discourses, their unacquaintance with scripture, in its doctrines, its language, or its history; their dulness of comprehension, their imperfect attention, and their ready forgetfulness of what they hear-all combine to render the amount of instruction which they gain the very least possible. There are two necessary effects of this :-First, that they continue grossly ignorant under the most instructive preaching. Secondly, that they are continually exposed to the danger of gaining their first religious knowledge and impressions from the irregular instruction of dissenters, and thus attaching to the church, in which they have long sat with drowsy ignorance, the idea of formality; and to those who have first instructed them in reality, that of true spiritual guides. Now, cottage readings appear to me to be, not merely the only available remedy for this difficulty, but to be in themselves admirably adapted for its removal. They are the only remedy, for it is quite impossible for a clergyman with an ordinary population* to carry on a regular course of religious instruction with each one of his people separately; time and opportunity are both wanting for such an attempt. But, moreover, the positive advantages of this plan are exceedingly great;-they appear to be chiefly these. By gathering the most uninstructed together, they economize time. Again, their intention being known, the clergyman may begin at once to instruct, instead of having to spend nearly all his leisure in leading his people up to their subject, as he must do, if he wishes to introduce religious instruction in the course of casual conversation. Thus, again, time is saved. They are peculiarly instructive-(1) because large and connected portions of holy scripture may thus be brought before our people, explained to them, and made the subject of prayer; (2) because they may be illustrated with a familiarity and homeliness of style and manner, enforced by a perpetual reiteration, and carried out into a particularity of personal application which would be impracticable in addresses from the pulpit. They are peculiarly attractive-(1) because they are intelligible; (2) because they bespeak a degree of earnestness in the teacher, in that they are clearly an unnecessary expenditure of time and labour, willingly undertaken for the instruction of his flock; (3) because they are a striking part of the aggressive system of parochial instruction; the seeking out the ignorant, and forcing knowledge upon them; the creating an appetite for spiritual teaching, which, sir, I think, are some of the peculiar benefits of this invaluable practice; and in this view of the matter every one of your correspondent's objections are untenable. It is not "an uncanonical service," for it is no service at all; it is a means of instruction. For the like reason, it is not adopting the "dissenting form of service;" nor can it be substituted for public worship at church, where the people are duly taught that it is not public worship. It is one of those methods of instructing our population during the week, which our church requires us to practice, and the particulars of which

What is an ordinary population? Surely with a thousand people separate instruction is anything but impossible. This population is mentioned about the proper number for one man.-ED.