rity depends on extensive
co-operation, and ultimately on the acceptance of common views. This
comes but slowly. But with much tribulation the goal may be reached,
if in case after case the effort is made to provide friendly help
through charities and private persons,--unless, as may well be, it
should seem best not to interfere, but to leave the applicant to apply
to the administrators of public relief. Experience of what is right
and wrong in charity is thus gained on both sides. Many sources may
have to be utilized for aid of different kinds even in a single case,
and for the prevention of distress co-operation with members of
friendly societies and with co-operative and thrift agencies is
indispensable.

The poor law.

Where there is accord between charity and the poor-law pauperism may be
largely reduced. The poor-law in most countries has at its disposal
certain institutional relief and out-door allowances, but it has no
means of devising plans of help which may prevent application to the
rates or "take" people "off the rates." Thus a widow in the first days
of widowhood applies and receives an allowance according to the number
of her children. Helped at the outset by charity on some definite plan,
she may become self-supporting; and if her family be large one or two of
her children may be placed in schools by the guardians, while she
maintains the remaining children and herself. As far as possible there
should be a division of labour between the poor-law and charity. Except
where some plan such as that just mentioned is adopted, one or the other
should take whole charge of the case relieved. There should be no
supplementation of poor-law relief by charity. This will weaken the
strength and dissipate the resources of charity without adding to the
efficiency of the poor-law. Unless the guardians adopt a restrictive
out-door relief policy, there is no scope for any useful division of
labour between them and charity; for the many cases which, taken in
time, charity might save from pauperism, they will draw into chronic
dependence by their allowances a very much larger number. But if there
is a restrictive out-door policy, so far as relief is necessary, charity
may undertake to meet on its own lines distress which the poor-law would
otherwise have met by allowances, and, subject to the assistance of
urgent cases, poor-law relief may thus by degrees become institutional
only. Then, in the ma