g that it is those very poor-laws which
give, under all circumstances, really legal security _to property_.
Without them, cases must frequently arise, which would, according to the
law of nature, according to the law of God, and as we shall see before we
have done, according to the law of England, bring us into a state, or, at
least, bring particular persons into a state, which as far as related to
them, would cause the law of nature to _revive_, and to make _all things
to be owned in common_. To adhere, then, to these poor-laws; to cause them
to be duly executed, to prevent every encroachment upon them, to preserve
them as the apple of our eye, are the duty of every Englishman, as far as
he has capacity so to do.
33. I have, my friends, cited, as yet, authorities only _on one side_ of
this great subject, which it was my wish to discuss in this one Number. I
find that to be impossible without leaving undone much more than half my
work. I am extremely anxious to cause this matter to be well understood,
not only by the working classes, but by the owners of the land and the
magistrates. I deem it to be of the greatest possible importance; and,
while writing on it, I address myself to you, because I most sincerely
declare that I have a greater respect for you than for any other body of
persons that I know any thing of. The next Number will conclude the
discussion of the subject. The whole will lie in a very small compass.
_Sixpence_ only will be the cost of it. It will creep about, by degrees,
over the whole of this kingdom. All the authorities, all the arguments,
will be brought into this small compass; and I do flatter myself that many
months will not pass over our heads, before all but misers and madmen will
be ashamed to talk of abolishing the poor-rates and of supporting the
needy by grants and subscriptions.
I am,
Your faithful friend and
Most obedient servant,
WM. COBBETT.
NUMBER II.
_Bollitree Castle, Herefordshire, 22d Sept. 1826._
MY EXCELLENT FRIENDS,
34. In the last Number, paragraph 33, I told you, that I would, in the
present Number, conclude the discussion of the great question of _theft,
or no theft_, in a case of taking another's goods without his consent, or
against his will, the taker being pressed by extreme necessity. I laid
before you; in the last Number, JUDGE HALE'S doctrine upon the subject;
and I there mentioned the foul conduct of BLACKSTONE, the author of the
"Comme
|