THE 
 
 WANT OF FIDELITY 
 
 IN 
 
 MINISTERS OF RELIGION 
 
 RESPECTING THE 
 
 NEW POOR LAW. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. THOMAS SPENCER, M.A., 
 
 PERPETUAL CURATE OF HINTON CHARTERHOUSE, NEAR BATH; 
 FORMERLY FELLOW OF ST. JOHNS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE; 
 AND DURING SIX YEARS A GUARDIAN 
 OF THE BATII UNION. 
 
 ELEVENTH THOUSAND. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 CHARLES GILPIN, 5, BISHOPSGATE STREET, WITHOUT; 
 AND SAMUEL GIBBS, 5, UNION STREET, BATH. 
 
 1814. 
 
 No. 10. 
 
{First Thousand printed May, 1841. 
 
THE WANT OF FIDELITY IN MINISTERS OF RELIGION 
 RESPECTING THE NEW POOR LAW. 
 
 Had sound principles been promulgated from every pulpit, our land 
 would not now be distinguished amongst the nations of Europe for 
 ignorance, pauperism, drunkenness, and crime. The business of 
 ministers of religion is to teach men to live soberly, righteously, and 
 godly in this present world; and to train up a peculiar people zealous 
 of good works. They are not to handle the word of God deceitfully, 
 but so fairly to set forth the Scripture that it may be “ profitable for 
 doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 
 that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all 
 good works.” 2 Tim. iii. 16. Instead of which, they have too generally 
 occupied the attention of their hearers with curious questions and 
 sectarian strife. The motives which induce such unfaithful preaching 
 are as dishonourable as the preaching itself is mischievous. National 
 abuses have, in every congregation, their representatives. The men 
 who, for gain, deluge the streets with gin, and those who enrich them¬ 
 selves by Poor Law abuses, sit in the chief seats of the church or 
 chapel; and, because they display great zeal for their party, though it 
 be a zeal which leads men to bite and devour one another, they are 
 recognised as members of a Christian church. In their presence it is 
 no easy task to speak the truth. It is easier with the hundreds of 
 prophets to flatter Ahab, than with a single Micaiah to speak that 
 which is evil concerning him. It is easier to display eloquence, than 
 to “ reprove, rebuke, and exhort.” It is easier to dwell upon those 
 topics of religion which interest the imagination, than to insist upon 
 those self-denying principles which improve the heart and rectify the 
 life. It is easier to preach about foreign missions, past prophecies, 
 with their future fulfilments, and to set forth the doctrines commonly 
 called evangelical, than to enforce upon all men a life of labour and of 
 self-support. Much of the religious profession of our day is united 
 with great pride and little honesty; with little brotherly kindness, and 
 still less of common sense. 
 
 The first teachers taught repentance; but they also required “ fruits 
 meet for repentancethey taught their hearers faith; but it was a 
 “faith that worketh by love and fulfilleth the lawand they reproved 
 them when their faith was barren and unfruitful. Of the sermons of 
 Christ, and of the epistles of the Apostles, a large portion is occupied 
 in enforcing practical duties: whereas a modern sermon, as long as 
 one of those epistles, frequently closes without one word bearing upon 
 the duties of common life. The Apostles taught their hearers to be 
 diligent in business; to provide things honest in the sight of all men; 
 and to owe no man any thing. They worked as well as taught; and 
 they followed up their good example by this universal precept, “ that 
 
4 
 
 ye study to be quiet and to do your own business, and to work with 
 your own hands as we commanded you: that ye may walk honestly 
 toward them that are without, and that ye may have lack of nothing.” 
 Christ and his Apostles expounded the commandment, “ Honour thy 
 father and thy mother,” as including a support of them in their old 
 age. The Apostles did not invent excuses for him that stole or that 
 coveted other men’s goods; but they besought him to “ labour, work¬ 
 ing with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give 
 to him that needeth.” 
 
 He that neglects his own trade or profession whereby he might pro¬ 
 vide for the present and future wants of his family, under the pretence 
 of spending his time in prayer, in reading the scripture, in hearing 
 sermons, in attending religious meetings, or in assisting religious 
 societies, is a dishonest man; and were it not that his conscience, 
 through false teaching, is unenlightened, he would be no better than 
 a robber. Seeing, as he.might, that his family may become charge¬ 
 able to the parish or to the subscriptions of charitable persons, he 
 picks their pockets in anticipation; and though in his secret thoughts 
 he relies on such future aid, he would no more dare to toll the parties 
 beforehand that he relies upon them for his future subsistence, than 
 the pickpocket would tell the victim whose money he was intending to 
 appropriate. That which he calls trusting in providence is, in reality, 
 tempting providence. Men that forsake the diligent application to 
 some trade or profession, and through a fancied regard for religion 
 require appeals to the benevolent in their own lifetime, or for their 
 families after their death, ought to be reminded that the declaration of 
 that religion is, “ If any would not work, neither should he eat.” 
 
 If to a congregation accustomed to the usual style of evangelical 
 preaching, a sermon were preached upon any of these passages, entering 
 into the same minute detail as is usual in sermons on other texts, many 
 of the self-styled spiritual part of the congregation would take offence, 
 and declare that it was mere morality; downright legality ; and that 
 the preacher held the dangerous heresy of salvation by works! Dare 
 these men preach the whole counsel of God ? Are there not parts 
 which they have shunned to declare ? They say that they preach 
 justification by faith: so did the Apostle Peter; yet ho also' enjoins, 
 “ And beside all this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; 
 and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to tem¬ 
 perance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly- 
 kindness ; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be 
 in you and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor 
 unfruitful;—but he that lacketh these things is blind and cannot see 
 afar off.” The Apostle Paul preached “repentance towards God and 
 faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ;” yet he thus expresses himself; 
 “ Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go 
 on to perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from 
 dead works and of faith towards God, of the doctrine of baptisms and 
 
of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal 
 judgment.” Heb. vi. 1; 2. He then cautions “ those who were once 
 enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made par¬ 
 takers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted of the good word of God 
 and the powers of the world to come,” to beware lest they fall away 
 through want of diligent attention to the duties of religion, and that 
 without fruitfulness in every good word and work, the means of grace 
 will prove to them a curse, and not a blessing; “ For the earth which 
 drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs, 
 meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing of God; hut 
 that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto 
 cursing, whose end is to he burned.” 
 
 In these days the ministers of religion are chiefly known to the 
 people by their endless appeals for money-. Whether it be for new 
 churches or chapels, for pastors at homo or missionaries abroad, the 
 perpetual cry is ‘ give, giveand a stranger would naturally infer that 
 the only thing required for the conversion of the world is a plentiful 
 supply of gold and silver. Yet the Apostle, whose single sermon 
 made three thousand converts, could say, “silver and gold have I 
 none and another Apostle, who says, “ From Jerusalem and round 
 about unto Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ,” could 
 also declare to the assembled ministers at Ephesus, “ I have coveted 
 no man’s silver or gold or apparel.” It is true that he collected 
 voluntary subscriptions for the relief of the destitute, hut he asked 
 nothing for pastoral or missionary purposes; nobly desiring that he 
 and other preachers should present the gospel without charge, recom¬ 
 mending it thereby to the favourable consideration of all men. Re¬ 
 specting his exertions for the poor, he says, “ Now I go unto Jerusalem 
 to minister unto the saints; for it hath pleased them of Macedonia to 
 make a contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem.” 
 Whereas to the Ephesian ministers he gives no encouragement to seek 
 for more ample funds for themselves, but, on the contrary, warns them 
 against the covetous practices which should gradually creep in among 
 them; he says, “ After my departure grievous wolves shall enter in 
 among you, not sparing the flock.” These are the “ dumb dogs that 
 cannot bark, greedy dogs that can never have enough.” These are 
 they that “ run greedily after the error of Balaam for reward.” In 
 opposition to this he urges them to imitate the example which he had 
 set, and which he thus describes, “ Ye yourselves know that these 
 hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were 
 with me. I have showed you all things, how that so labouring ye 
 ought to support tiie weak, and to remember the words of the Lord 
 Jesus, how he said, ‘it is more blessed to give than to receive.’” 
 How superior is this to that preaching of a barren divinity which takes 
 so large a portion of the people’s wealth for the support of ministers, 
 whilst the poor and the weak are sent to a parish to be maintained by 
 a compulsory tax levied upon industry ! 
 
6 
 
 Can we wonder that gold is the object of a nation's idolatry when 
 ministers of religion display such eagerness to obtain it ? The demand 
 is not so much for a field of labour as for a good living. The ques¬ 
 tion is not what opportunities of usefulness present themselves, but 
 how great is the income, and how small the duty ? Nor is this peculiar 
 to the established church. The question propounded by the ambitious 
 dissenter is, How far is the congregation distinguished by respectability ? 
 Are they sufficiently intelligent to appreciate superior talent ? Can 
 they provide a handsome income for a popular preacher ? With an 
 income of six millions to the established church, and a large amount 
 to dissenting ministers and religious institutions—whilst the national 
 expenditure annually exceeds the national income—whilst the country 
 is groaning under an overwhelming debt—whilst bankruptcy becomes 
 painfully common, ministers of religion have ceased to hold up to men 
 a standard of self-denying industry and of moral integrity, and have 
 given their sanction to a system of begging and of debt. Places of 
 worship are erected with borrowed money; and religious societies, 
 however liberal the contributions of the public, intentionally exceed 
 their income. And this perpetually getting into debt is used as a per¬ 
 petual plea for increasing supplies from the people. With such an 
 example set by ministers of religion, it is not surprising that debt, 
 begging, and bankruptcy descend from the pulpit and platform to the 
 shop of the tradesman and to the fireside of the mechanic; and that, 
 under the pretence of trusting in providence, men become bankrupt 
 without shame, and defraud their creditors -without remorse. 
 
 There is too great a distinction made between ministers of religion 
 and other men; and it is owing to this that so many leave the ordinary 
 pursuits of life in order to live upon their congregations. If the desire 
 to do good were the only inducement—if the love of ease and emolu¬ 
 ment formed no part—then would there be more persons ready to 
 labour even without remuneration. The late Rev. C. Simeon, of 
 Cambridge, declared to the students of the University who attended 
 his ministry, that their particular business was to attend to the studies 
 of the College; and that they had no right to read the Bible when 
 they ought to be reading mathematics. He stated, that, whenever 
 young men relinquished these studies under the pretence of reading 
 divinity, he had always found that their reading divinity was synony¬ 
 mous with idleness and ignorance. If young men are now permitted 
 to occupy their time with divinity, to the neglect of honest pursuits, 
 without such rebuke, it may be accounted for by another expression 
 which I heard Mr. Simeon use—“ The time was when evangelical 
 ministers were like a river that was very narrow, but very deep; but 
 now they are as a river that is very broad and very shallow.” 
 
 A distinguished dissenting minister, Dr. Bennett, has recently 
 delivered a series of lectures on church history, in which, when speak¬ 
 ing of the theology of the early church, he informed his auditors that 
 the nearer we approach to the time of the Apostles, the purer was the 
 
7 
 
 church; that after the second century there was a great falling off 
 from the simplicity of the gospel: yet in the high estimate which he 
 elsewhere gives of the study of divinity, he appears to forget his own 
 statement that there were no divines or theologians in the first two 
 centuries. These are his words, “ Three centuries the church lived 
 with but one biblical scholar—Origen, and not one that could be called 
 a divine“ theology, in its highest sense, the science of divine reve¬ 
 lation, was to the early church unknown.” Yet that early church was 
 the purest, and was content to draw its doctrines from the scriptures 
 alone. Again, he says, “ Of election little was said before Augustine’s 
 time“ the depravity of human nature never obtained the share of 
 attention which its importance demanded“ of the atonement it is 
 afflicting to observe how sparingly and inadequately the fathers speak 
 “ the sacraments are scarcely, if at all, mentioned in the first century.” 
 From all which it appears that the topics of modern divinity and of 
 pulpit oratory, were seldom alluded to when the church was purest; 
 but that when preachers sought to be good divines rather than good 
 men—when they turned from the] glaring evils which afflict society, 
 and devoted themselves to abstruse points of theology, the church 
 degenerated. These are Dr. Bennett’s words, “Christian morals 
 manifestly deteriorate as we advance to Clement and Origen, and 
 Christians are compared to the polypus, which takes the colour of any¬ 
 thing to which it happens to adhere. Lewdness and drunkenness are 
 charged even upon the ministers of religion. On death, departed souls, 
 the resurrection, immortality, antichrist, and the millenium, a farrago 
 of truth and error is uttered, though the apostolic fathers are free from 
 this censure. ” 
 
 Had there been less study of divinity and more regard to the duties 
 of common life; had religion propagated itself, not by abstract theories, 
 but as in the first century, by the bright shining of example, and by 
 simplicity of preaching, Christianity would not be the mere name, 
 which it now is to most, and an object of contempt to many. If the 
 prophet Ezekiel were to address the eloquent divines of the present 
 day, it is to be feared that his language would be, “Woe unto the 
 foolish prophets that follow their own spirit and have seen nothing. 
 0, Israel! thy prophets are like the foxes of the deserts. Ye have 
 not gone up into the gaps, neither made up the hedge for the house of 
 Israel to stand in the battle. They have seen vanity and lying 
 divination.” How can they be without excuse who, in the midst 
 of a pauperised and drunken poor, and with legal dishonesty and 
 political turpitude amongst the rich, instead of “ warning every man 
 and teaching every man,” after the manner of the Apostle, are con¬ 
 tent with the applause of an admiring audience! Surely the same 
 responsibility attaches to them as to the prophets of old, if they are 
 wanting in fidelity: “ When I say unto the wicked, thou shalt surely 
 die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the 
 wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked 
 
8 
 
 ■man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine • 
 hand.” 
 
 When external profession takes the place of real piety; when indis¬ 
 criminate almsgiving usurps the province of judicious benevolence; 
 when indolence feeds on state pensions or on parish pay; when mem¬ 
 bers of parliament, elected by bribery and intimidation, yet falsely 
 pretending to be the' representatives of the people, uphold oppressive 
 laws; and when the degraded multitudes betake themselves to the 
 intoxicating cup for comfort; then is the command given to every 
 minister of religion, “ Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a 
 trumpet and shew my people their transgressions.” To the clergy 
 who receive the tithes, and to the dissenting ministers who receive the 
 pew rents from the congregations to whom they speak smooth things, 
 and from whom they keep back all faithful admonitions, the language 
 of scripture is, “ Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; woe 
 be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves ! Should not 
 the shepherds feed the flocks ? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with 
 the wool, ye kill them that are fed; but ye feed not the flock. The 
 diseased have ye not stkengthened, neither have ye healed 
 that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, 
 neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither 
 have ye sought that .which was lost; but with force and with cruelty 
 have ye ruled them: my flock was scattered upon all the face of the 
 earth, and none did seal ah or seek after them.” 
 
 The prophet Jeremiah gives an unfailing test of a true teacher. “ I 
 have not sent these prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, 
 yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in jiy counsel, and had 
 caused my people to hear my words, then they should have 
 
 TURNED THEM FROM THEIR EVIL WAY AND FROM THE EVIL OF 
 
 their doings.” Jeremiah xxiii. 21. And as to studying the writings 
 or preaching the doctrines of divines, “Is not my word like as a fire ? 
 saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces ? 
 Therefore behold I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal 
 my words every one from his neighbour.” Whoever will read the 
 memoir of Pastor Oberlin will see the Christian pastor in perfection; 
 and in the lives of Scott and Cecil, two of the early evangelical minis¬ 
 ters, he will find that they gave great offence to many religious pro¬ 
 fessors by the practical nature of their preaching. It would be well 
 if the successors of these men would more frequently deserve this 
 reproach. It would be a proof of fidelity, and well for society, if, as 
 in their case, the mere professors of religion should depart because 
 they had been exhorted to “ cease to do evil, and to learn to do well.” 
 
 The shrewd John Bunyan, in his Pilgrim’s Progress, shows that 
 there were religious professors in his day, who avoided those parts of 
 religion which bring self-denial, trouble, and persecution, but who 
 “ delight to talk of the history or the mystery of things,” and who 
 “ love to talk of miracles, wonders, or signs.” The following is the 
 
9 
 
 reply which he represents Talkative as giving to Faithful: “ To talk 
 of such things is most profitable; for by so doing a man may get 
 knowledge of many things; as of the vanity of earthly things, and the 
 benefit of things above. A man may learn the necessity of the new 
 birth; the insufficiency of our works; the need of Christ’s righteous¬ 
 ness ; what it is to repent, to believe, to pray, to suffer, or the like ; 
 what are the great promises or consolations of the gospel to his own 
 comfort; to refute false opinions, to vindicate the truth, and also to 
 instruct the ignorant.” Talkative further assures Faithful that he 
 could give him a hundred scriptures to prove that “a man can receive 
 nothing except it be given him from heaven; and that all is of grace, 
 not of works.” Indeed so learned a divine is he, that when Faithful 
 asked him upon what subject they should found their discourse, Talka¬ 
 tive replied, “ What you will; I will talk of things heavenly or of 
 things earthly; things moral or things evangelical; things sacred or 
 things profane; things past or things to come; things foreign or 
 things at home; things more essential or things circumstantial; pro¬ 
 vided. that all be done to our profit.” 
 
 One of the favourite occupations of ministers of religion is to rail at 
 the Church of Rome; yet they meanwhile appropriate to themselves 
 all the infallibility of the Pope, and usurp his power of excommunica¬ 
 tion ; and whilst they revile, there are ministers of that church doing 
 more real service than all that these protestant revilers have ever done. 
 Father Mathew, in taking the intoxicating cup from the lips of Irer 
 land’s sons, exhibits unwearied zeal, united with Christian meekness 
 and sound judgment; whereas we find Dr. Edgar, the protestant 
 professor of divinity, at Belfast, decrying this remedy for 
 drunkenness; satisfying himself with giving lectures on divinity; and 
 despising the practical man who has thus been instrumental in “binding 
 up that which was broken, and bringing again that which was driven 
 away, and seeking that which was lost.” In a letter recently pub¬ 
 lished, he says, “I entertain the most confirmed abhorrence of 
 teetotalism, as insulting to God and disgraceful to man.” Teetotalism 
 has done good to millions, and harm to none. It has brought thou¬ 
 sands to places of warship, and has restored health, peace, and 
 prosperity to them and their families; yet because it interferes with 
 the vested interests of the maker and seller of strong drink, there are 
 many ministers w'ho dare not oppose the vice of drunkenness lest they 
 should offend some influential member of their congregation. In 
 England we profess to be astonished at the cow’ardly conduct of the 
 ministers of religion of the United States; we are accustomed to say 
 that they are silent upon the horrors of slavery, because it would be 
 attended with serious consequences if they were to speak boldly as 
 they ought to speak; but we may notice the same want of fidelity at 
 home respecting the slavery into which the drinking customs of our 
 land have brought the mass of the people. “I am in a ticklish situa¬ 
 tion,” said a dissenting minister to me, “ I am in a ticklish situation,” 
 
10 
 
 repeated this pastor of a flock, nominally independent, in the pre¬ 
 sence of all who were about to take part in a Temperance meeting. 
 And what was his situation? He wished to favour the cause of 
 Temperance, but one of the most influential members of his congrega¬ 
 tion was the largest innkeeper in the town, and another was a brewer! 
 
 That this silence on subjects which deeply affect the national wel¬ 
 fare is not confined to a small number of dissenting ministers, 
 abundant proof could be furnished. The Patriot, indeed, states, that 
 “ the protestant dissenting ministers of this country are emphatically 
 the teachers of the people, especially of the middle classes, and have a 
 very large share in guiding public opinionyet in the anniversary of 
 the Religious Freedom Society, as reported in the columns of that 
 paper, we find the Rev. Mr. Giles, of Leeds, himself a dissenting 
 minister, complaining bitterly of dissenting ministers in general “ for 
 their fear of speaking out on account of the more wealthy and influen¬ 
 tial members of their congregations. It was not of the people he was 
 afraid, but of ministers of religion, and of a few rich people in the 
 congregation whispering in their ears.” He added, “I know they will 
 see a few half-hearted friends shrinking from their pews, but the 
 question is, are we to instruct the people, or are they to instruct us ? 
 Are we to speak the truth when it is popular, or when it is not ? 
 When it is needed, or when it is not ? Are we to enlighten the people 
 when they are in the full blaze of meridian sunshine, or when they are 
 in the dark ? I maintain that we, as ministers of religion, must stand 
 forward, look on this as our -work, and determine, in the name of God, 
 that the work shall be done.” 
 
 Some ministers of religion flatter themselves that pauperism is an 
 evil with which they have nothing to do; and others have shown such 
 ignorance of human nature and of Christianity as to express a wish to 
 see almshouses erected in every parish, and to see the poor comfortably 
 provided for, without any care of their own: yet Christ himself, who 
 was able to provide abundantly for all, suffered his disciples to hunger, 
 and before he fed them, he permitted the multitude to be with him 
 three days, as a test of the purity of the motives which induced them 
 to come to him; and when they followed him again, in the hope of a 
 similar repast, he sent them away with this just rebuke, “Verily, 
 verily, I say unto you, ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, 
 but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled.” John vi. 26. 
 In like manner when God himself led the Israelites through the wil- 
 demesss, he permitted them to suffer hunger that he might “humble 
 them and prove them and do them good in their latter end:” and 
 when, having food and raiment, they were not therewith content, he 
 brought upon them fresh trials. In the 21st chapter of Numbers, we 
 read, “And the people spake against God and against Moses, where¬ 
 fore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness ? for 
 there is no bread, neither is there any water, and our soul loatheth 
 this light bread. And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, 
 
11 
 
 and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.” The 
 Apostles themselves so distributed the funds placed at their disposal 
 as to cause murmuring among certain widows; a class at the present 
 time most covetous of parish pay, and also the chief murmurers. When 
 the deacons were chosen, they acted partly as Guardians of the poor 
 and partly as preachers of the gospel. Timothy was a bishop, yet 
 the Apostle Paul instructs him minutely on the subject of pauperism, 
 and especially urges him to prevent imposition. 
 
 Not only were ministers of religion always connected with the relief 
 of the poor, but in all ages ecclesiastical property has been partly 
 devoted to this purpose. Under the Mosaic dispensation it was said, 
 “At the end of every three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe 
 of thine increase the same year; and the Levite and the stranger, and 
 the fatherless and the widow which are within thy gates, shall come and 
 shall eat and be satisfied.” Deut. xiv.28. Valuable as was the time of 
 the Apostle Paul, and indifferent as he was to his own wealth, even to 
 the extent of refusing the hire, of which, as a labourer, he was worthy, 
 yet he was frequently engaged in collecting subscriptions for the 
 supply of food to the Christians who were suffering through famine. 
 The funds of the Roman Catholic Church were partly appropriated 
 to the support of the poor. The property of the Church of England 
 was in like manner vested in the Clergy, as trustees, for the support 
 of themselves, for the service of the church, and for the relief of the poor. 
 
 If the clergy had always preached sound doctrine, and had endea¬ 
 voured to discountenance indolence and the love of gifts—if the 
 enormous wealth of the bishops and rich incumbents had been appro¬ 
 priated to the relief of unavoidable destitution—if dissenting ministers 
 had proved themselves true shepherds by driving their flocks from the 
 withering pastures of pauperism—if every denomination had taken 
 charge of its own poor, as the Quakers have done, we should not now 
 have to speak of pauperism as the disgrace, and of poor rates as the 
 oppression, of England. 
 
 In Scotland the poor are relieved more nearly after the apostolic 
 manner. The contributions are voluntary, and they vary according to 
 the destitution of those who receive and. to the munificence of those 
 who give; and on these two things they ought to depend. And 
 although there are in Scotland many evils caused by intemperance, 
 and although the soil is far less fertile than that of England, yet the 
 people are better educated, more industrious, more frugal, and more 
 independent. It is to Scotland that we apply for trustworthy stewards 
 and overlookers, and for well-qualified schoolmasters. In England 
 also relief to the poor was once an affair of the congregation and 
 minister. It was administered by churchwardens; to the church 
 congregation notice was given when a rate was required; in the church 
 vestry it was determined whether such rate should be granted; there 
 the money was paid to the poor; and of the vestry which decided 
 these matters the clergyman was the chairman. It was obviously 
 
12 
 
 connected with ministers of religion from first to last. Those of the 
 clergy who performed these arduous duties faithfully, gained an insight 
 into the subject of pauperism, and have since been the strenuous sup¬ 
 porters of the New Poor Law as an attempt to diminish its evils; 
 whilst those who deemed themselves too spiritual to preside at a pay 
 table, are perpetually blundering in such matters. In a pamphlet 
 entitled, “ The Pauper’s Advocate; a cry from the brink of the grave 
 against the New Poor Law,” Samuel Roberts, the author, says that 
 the clergy in general are favourable to this law, and that they fre¬ 
 quently act as guardians under it. Without intending it, he has borne 
 an honourable testimony to those clergymen who, by their preaching, 
 writing, and active services, have endeavoured to revive in the poor 
 their former spirit of industry and manly independence. The com¬ 
 pliment which he pays to dissenting ministers, if deserved by them, 
 would he an argument against the prevailing system of dissent; 
 inasmuch as it would show that the ministers chosen and maintained 
 by the people are either too ignorant to understand the nature of 
 pauperism, or so completely at the mercy of their congregations 
 for a maintenance, that they dare not bring before them the whole 
 counsel of God. Can this be the explanation of the phenome¬ 
 non that dissent has rendered so little aid to the country, in her 
 hour of need, against the combined forces of depraved pauperism, 
 political hypocrisy, and sordid self-interest ? Have dissenting minis¬ 
 ters fearlessly defended this unpopular law, so important as a first step 
 towards the freedom of charity ? Have they not been silent except 
 on one or two minor points which affect their sectarian interests ? 
 
 Perhaps no one suffers so much from the want of fidelity in the 
 ministers of religion as the pauper himself. He that is born, reared, 
 married, supported, and buried, at the cost of others, is a failure in 
 creation, and is utterly unprepared to give an account of his stew¬ 
 ardship. He is the barren fig tree which cumbers the ground, and is 
 not only unproductive but absolutely injurious. • A man who hides 
 his one talent in a napkin, under the plea that some had five, and 
 others ten talents, should be taught that he is responsible for the use 
 of that one. False friends may soothe him in the troubles which he 
 brings upon himself, but a time is coming when he will lament that 
 ever he saw such friends. In this world of trial no man may act for 
 another or make atonement unto God for him. Those persons take a 
 wrong view of the poor man’s condition who encourage him to rely 
 upon charitable funds. Such funds can only exist through the instru¬ 
 mentality of industrious men; and it is a low sense of justice that so 
 readily takes the earnings of the industrious to give to those whom 
 capricious charity may think fit to patronise. Despotic and selfish 
 men wish to have the lower classes as dependent upon them as possi¬ 
 ble ; therefore they look with more favour upon the pauper and the 
 criminal, who cringe to them for support, than upon the independent 
 labourer, who will neither fawn nor flatter. The poor man, however, 
 
13 
 
 stands upon the same level with other men, and must give an account 
 of the deeds done in the body. He is invited to fight the same good 
 fight, and to run in the same honourable race; and, therefore, that 
 man is guilty of cruel treachery who leads him to rely upon other men; 
 who teaches him to evade the general law, “In the sweat of thy face 
 thou shalt cat bread.” The best affections of paupers are invariably 
 destroyed. Parents learn to regard their children as a source of gain; 
 and children in their turn expect to derive profit from their aged 
 parents. It is not uncommon for them to refuse to perform the 
 slightest office for each other except paid for by the parish. This 
 utter absence of all proper feeling is owing to legalised charity; and 
 it is the province of ministers of religion to turn the hearts of such 
 fathers to their children, and of such children to their fathers. 
 
 Much has been said respecting compulsory religion and church rates; 
 and hut little respecting compulsory charity and poor-rates. Yet 
 charity is greater than faith; and if true faith may be left to propa¬ 
 gate itself, still more so may true charity. It is much more probable 
 that the inhabitants of a parish, if allowed to follow their own feelings, 
 would neglect to support a place of worship, than that they would 
 permit a fellow-creature to die in the street. Church rates are a 
 serious evil, but in the outcry against them, the dissenter seems to 
 forget, that poor rates involve the same evil in a higher degree. If 
 six hundred Unions erect chapels in their workhouses, appoint to each 
 a chaplain, and provide for each, fittings up, surplices, books, and 
 sacramental wine, out of the poor rates; if, out of the same poor rates, 
 the borough and county rates are taken, from which the salaries are 
 paid to the chaplains of all the gaols in the kingdom; if the fees for 
 the burial of all the paupers and criminals are taken from the same 
 rate, is it not clear that the money forcibly obtained from the dissenter, 
 under the pretence of charity, is a greater grievance than that collected 
 under the pretence of propagating the Christian faith ? Wherein does 
 the difference consist ? How is it that dissenting ministers can dis¬ 
 course at great length respecting religious freedom, and descant upon 
 the evils of India and the oppression of Africa, and yet not say one 
 word in defence of the unpopular poor law, of the freedom of charity, 
 and of the deliverance of the poor from the bondage of pauperism ! 
 
 Spurious charity prevails to an alarming extent, and it is the pro¬ 
 vince of ministers of religion to expose and check it. It is for them 
 to show that a man may give all his goods to feed the poor, and yet 
 not have charity; that lie may make long prayers, and pay tithes of all 
 that he possesses, and yet he a hypocrite. “Love worketh no ill to his 
 neighbourwhereas false charity professing unbounded benevolence, 
 when thwarted in its plans, or when confronted by men who do not ap¬ 
 prove of its proceedings, exhibits the most angry passions, gives vent 
 to the most savage expressions, and is guilty of the most cruel deeds. 
 
 Instead of trying to place charity upon its right foundation, dis¬ 
 senters are endeavouring to obtain certain privileges for their paupers 
 
14 
 
 in the Union workhouses; but the more they obtrude their dissenting 
 inmates before the public, the more they will expose their own igno¬ 
 rance of the nature of pauperism and of Christianity. Do dissenting 
 ministers wish to send forth their paupers as their epistles, to be 
 known and read of all men ? Bad indeed then is the handwriting; and 
 wretched the sentiments inscribed thereon ! Are these their burning 
 and shining lights to which they would direct the people’s gaze? 
 There is a wide diiference between the Bible-poor and the pauper- 
 poor : the true Christian is humbled by his afflictions and corrected 
 by his suiferings; and on the first opportunity, he escapes from his 
 poverty and provides for himself; whereas the pauper clings to the 
 outward badges of poverty, and feigns them, if he has them not. 
 Take away his rags and cleanse his person, and to-morrow the good 
 apparel you have given him will be in pawn, and you will again see 
 him in rags and filth; for, were he to appear as respectable as you 
 left him, he would lose many of his benefactors. Of the numbers ad¬ 
 mitted in a given time into the Bath Union workhouse, 1681 were 
 churchmen and 93 dissenters; of the burials during that time, there 
 had been 214 churchmen and 15 dissenters. Of the adults in the 
 house on the 12th of May, 1841, 289 were churchmen and 23 
 were dissenters. If dissenting churches will not maintain their own 
 poor, then, instead of demanding that these 23 shall come out of the 
 house to attend their meetings on Sundays, let their ministers avail 
 themselves of the privilege which the law allows, of assembling them 
 at suitable times for religious instruction within the house. The law 
 does not offer a salary for this, but it permits the shepherd who is not 
 a hireling to come and look after his own sheep; and if any impedi¬ 
 ment be thrown in their way by the forms of the house or by the 
 rules of the Poor Law Commissioners, let them petition the legislature 
 for the removal of such impediments. Let them point out any one of 
 the 23 pauper dissenters whom they regard as a sincere Christian. 
 I know a large Union workhouse the master of which is a conscien¬ 
 tious dissenter, who has discharged his duties faithfully to the satisfac¬ 
 tion of all the guardians; and with this master, after he had held his 
 office about eighteen months, I had the following conversation:— 
 
 What did you think of the workhouse when you first entered upon 
 your duties ? I was astonished at the good things provided for the 
 inmates. I would not desire better provisions for my own family; I 
 had no conception that so much was done for the poor. 
 
 Have you found the paupers thankful for all that is done for them ? 
 Not at all. They always speak of it as their right. They say the 
 house was built for them; that the poor-rates are for them; and that 
 the officers are paid to wait on them. I have been, astonished to see 
 how little care they take of the property of the Union; they will com¬ 
 mit injury to the furniture and to their clothes, and will waste their 
 food without the least scruple. 
 
 How many religious persons do you suppose there may be amongst 
 
15 
 
 them ? I can speak with confidence of only one, whom I have fre¬ 
 quently seen engaged in a room by himself, in a most devout manner. 
 He is blind and deaf; and, perhaps, on this account, he has escaped 
 the contaminating influence of their conversation. 
 
 Is the language of the paupers so corrupting ? It is shocking; and, 
 indeed, the chief evil that those of a better sort have to complain of, 
 is the constant quarrels, oaths, and disgusting conversation of the 
 inmates of the ward in which they live. 
 
 Are there no others, besides the blind man, of whose religion you 
 entertain some hope ? There are three or four aged women of whom 
 I am inclined to think favourably. 
 
 A similar testimony was given me by the excellent chaplain of that 
 workhouse, who informed me that in every instance in which he had 
 looked upon any inmate as actuated by religious principles, circum¬ 
 stances had occurred which completely destroyed his hopes. 
 
 Because true religion is respected and trusted, it is counterfeited: 
 because real poverty is pitied and relieved, it is imitated: and if to the 
 poor amongst dissenters the law should attach privileges, the pauper 
 dissenters will become more numerous. There is no way of obtaining 
 money which an indolent man will not adopt in preference to his daily 
 toil. There is no creed that pauperism would not readily profess to 
 gain the privilege of wandering about from house to house, begging 
 and drinking. The complaints of the inmates of a workhouse in Bath, 
 before the formation of the Union, induced the overseer to order that 
 the privilege of attending then - respective places of worship, which the 
 assistant overseer had denied, should be restored. Coming to the 
 workhouse on the Sunday evening to observe the order in which they 
 returned, he had the mortification of witnessing every one of them 
 returning in a state of intoxication. He instantly gave up his own 
 order, and requested the assistant overseer to proceed as before. This, 
 fact I had from the overseer himself. In those churches in which the 
 sacrament money is distributed amongst the poor persons who have 
 partaken of the sacrament, there is an overflowing attendance of the 
 poor upon this solemn ordinance. The service for the churching of 
 women has been similarly abused. The curate of a large parish in 
 Bath gave a gratuity to women who came to be churched, thinking 
 that, after their confinement, they were objects of sympathy. The 
 rapid increase in the number of women who came to be churched 
 having led him to make inquiry, he discovered that many of them had 
 never had children at all, but that they had gone through the cere¬ 
 mony of churching in order to obtain the gifts. In like manner the 
 chaplain of a Union workhouse informed me that he had been in the 
 habit of giving money to some of the inmates on their leaving the 
 workhouse; but that many had left the house for the purpose of 
 obtaining his gratuity, and having spent it at a public house, returned 
 to the workhouse in a state of intoxication. In course of time an 
 inmate came to the chaplain’s residence and demanded the halfcrovon 
 
16 
 
 which was given to those who left the workhouse; and on the demand 
 being refused, she flew into a rage, and declared she had a right to it. 
 With such facts before us, will it be wise to confer on all inmates of 
 workhouses who choose to call themselves dissenters, the privilege of 
 going out once a-week ? I think not. Let dissenting ministers take 
 in their turn the office of guardian; instead of foolish and unlearned 
 questions in divinity, which do gender strifes, let them become 
 acquainted with pauper habits. Let them visit their poor brethren if 
 they desire it; but let them not incur the risk of encouraging pauperism 
 and hypocrisy; and let all the ministers of religion discourage in the 
 poor the desire of gifts. Let them remind their people that the 
 account they must one day give, will not be of what others have done 
 for them, but of what they have done for themselves. Let them teach 
 the young that the first pra3'er for themselves, which they are com¬ 
 manded to offer, is for daily bread; and that the first duty which they 
 are commanded to perform, is to earn it. Let them discover the 
 obstacles which impede the prosperity of the labouring man, and seek 
 'the removal of all laws which bear unjustly upon him. Let them pro¬ 
 cure for industry free scope, that diligence and good conduct may 
 obtain their reward. Set before the young man the facilities which 
 provident institutions will afford him to provide for himself and family 
 in the time of adversity, sickness, and old age. If ignorant, place 
 within his reach the means of instruction; if desponding, rouse his 
 energies; bid him rise to the first duty of man—self-support; but do 
 not support him. Do not render him worthless, by doing for him 
 that which God has given him to do, and for the doing of which he 
 . must give account. 
 
 JUT Each of the following Tracts, (price 2d.) by the Rev. T. Spencer, 
 weighs, with an envelope, less than half an ounce -•