eltaniugo from %tut luoko frith Craht

MASTERS AND MEN IN PRESTON.

Preston has always borne a highly respectable character among the manufacturing towns of Lancashire. "Proud Preston" is the name by which it is familiarly known throughout the county; term not merely alliterative, but due to the superior neatness and oleudiness of the streets of Preston, compared with some of the rude manufacturing towns and hamlets in its vicinity. Of late years, however, the reports of the condi- tion and education of its working classes have not been strictly in keeping with the character of the town ; and, although it has grown as rapidly in population and wealth as most of the boroughs in that district, it does not seem to have made much progress in substantial improvement. tion and education of its working classes have not been strictly in keeping with the character of the town ; and, although it has grown as rapidly in population and wealth as most of the boroughs in that district, it does not seem to have made much progress in substantial improvement. Among the witnesses examined before the House of Commons Com- mittee appointed, last session, to inquire into the system under which public-houses, hotels, beer-shops, saloons, coffeehouse; theatres, temper- ance hotels, and places of public entertainment, are sanctioned and regu- lated, was the Reverend John Clay, Chaplain to the Preston House of Correction. That gentleman, whose annual reports on the state of crime in North Lancashire are so well known, has paid much attention to the drinking customs of the working classes; and the conclusion to which he has come, after thirty-two years' residence in Preston, is, that, while the more intelligent classes in that town are gradually becoming more tem- perate in their habits, a considerable portion of the working population- " the very ignorant—seem to be more prone to drunkenness." The drink- ing is now confined to a smaller class, but within that class there is more drunkenness than formerly. Speaking of the last few years, he says, the labouring classes have grown worse, simply because they have had better wages. "In 1847 and 1848, a labouring man had no money to spend in drink. In 1851 and 1852, since the times have become better, he has more to spend, and he spends it." In order to show the amount of money spent by working men on intoxicating liquors, Mr. Clay referred to a table of the weekly earnings of 131 artisans and labourers, all employed by one master, in which he gave the percentage spent in drink by each man.

Most of the men earned from 20s. to 308. a week, and seven of them even as high as 408. Of the whole 131, there were only 12 persons who spent

nothing on drink. The expenditure of the remaining 119 ranged from 5 to 75 per cent of their weekly earnings. The aggregate of the sum spent on liquor every week was 341. 158 , or rather more than 22 per cent of their whole wages. With such habits as these, who can wonder at their readiness to listen to any declaimer who chooses to tell them that they are oppressed by the masters, and that they ought to have 10 per cent more wages ? If we take the 119 working men included in the Reverend Mr. Clay's table as a fair sample of the whole, it is evident that they could raise their real wages more than 20 per cent by simply abstaining from the use of intoxicating liquors.

But it would be wrong to blame the operatives alone for the mode in which they waste their earnings and ruin their constitutions. From the account which Mr. Clay gives of the state of Preston with regard to places of public amusement, it is evident that the " captains of industry " in that town have most shamefully neglected their duty. As he had spoken

in very strong terms of the demoralizing tendency of the concert-rooms and dancing-rooms in Preston, Sir George Grey asked whether there were any places of innocent amusement open to the working classes, to which they might resort if they chose. Mr. Clay's answer is full of in- struction.

" Not so much as I should wish was the case. I may take the opportunity of mentioning that, nevertheless, a great deal might be done. I think it was in the year 1834 that in Preston we opened a large suite of rooms, con-

taining all kinds of natural curiosities, ingenious pieces of mechanism, and things of that kind : we kept the place open for more than six months. The

suite of rooms consisted of two galleries fifty yards long, connected by three large rooms at one end, and a short gallery at the other end. For six mouths I ..lent myself nearly every night. I have seen the place quite

filled. There were respectable persons occasionally engaged to sing to the pianoforte. Over and over again my friends among the labouring classes have said, ' Mr. Clay, the public-houses are cursing this place.' The fuct was, that these exhibitions kept open for six months, and were attractive, not merely to the poor, to the working man and the working boy, but they were attractive to the higher classes also."

He afterwards states, that the exhibition was closed at last, not owing to any falling-off in the attendance, but simply because the owners of

pictures and articles of vertu wished to have their property returned to them. While it lasted it was attended by crowds of the working classes, although the charge for admission was higher than what is demanded to

casinos. Mr. Clay, who had been chairman of the Exhibition Committee, and naturally took much interest in its success' said, the crowd was so great that it sometimes took him half an hour to make his way through

the rooms. When asked whether he had not been very favourably im- pressed with the behaviour of the people who attended, Mr. Clay ex- pressed himself very emphatically in the affirmative-

" I am quite satisfied that no country in the world possesses finer human material to work upon than may be found in North Lancashire, and that they are people who would amply reward any efforts for their moral ame- lioration."

Now this exhibition took place in 1834—nineteen years ago ; and yet, during all the time that has elapsed since, the middle and higher classes of Preston have done nothing to provide wholesome and attractive amuse- ments and recreation for the working men and women of that large town. A public garden, we believe, is in course of preparation, and will beready in a year or two. But, as regards the past, the natural aristocracy of Preston have done nothing worthy of note, during all that time, for the moral amelioration of the thousands of hard-working operatives—" the finest human material in the world "—by whom they are surrounded. As a mere pecuniary speculation, it would probably have been a very good investment for "Proud Preston" had it turned its attention to this matter a few years ago. To talk of spending 30,0001. or 40,0001. in the construction of a crystal palace and pleasure-gardens for the people, would, no doubt, have been deemed a very extravagant proposal ; yet, compare that outlay with the loss which the town is now sustaining from the strike, and it sinks into a mere trifle. In actual loss of wages and profits, every week of the present contest will cost Preston not less than 15,000/. Supposing it to last only two months,—a very moderate calcu- lation, for the demagogue orators encourage the men to hold out to Christ- mas,—the total cost estimated in money will be 120,0001. ; and even that is not to be compared with the injury to health, morality, and good feeling, produced by a struggle of this kind. The exhibition in 1834 brought the working class and their employers into close personal contact "with the very greatest benefit to both parties," says Mr. Clay. We have no doubt of it : and it is this very want of intermingling with each other—the want of good feeling between masters and men—which has first led to the estrangement of the two classes, and finally to that melancholy trial of strength which we now witness.

INJUSTICE TO IRELAND.

When one takes into account tho very large amount of annoyance t which the Poor-law Guardians in most of our large towns are subjected in the performance of their onerous duties, through the influx of Irish paupers and vagrants, it is but fair to make considerable allowance for a little irritation now and then. Guardians are but men, and, unfortunately, not always the men best adapted for the task to which they have been appointed. But although some allowance may be made for a little grum- bling in those unions where one-third of the weekly expenditure goes to Irish paupers, that can never form an excuse for their acting with undue harshness in any special instance : indeed, considering the class with whom they have to deal, and the advantage that is always taken of any case of cruelty toward Irish pauper; it becomes all the more necessary that Eng- lish Guardians should be on their guard to prevent any mistake or hasty proceeding from being converted into "political capital" by Irish agita- tors. A case of this kind has been made the subject of a return, moved for, a few days before the prorogation of Parliament, by Mr. F. W. Rus- sell, Member for Limerick ; consisting of certain correspondence be- tween the Poor-law Board at Whitehall, the Poor-law Commission- ers in Dublin, and the Guardians of the Parish of St. Luke, Middlesex, relative to the removal of a poor family from London to Limerick. A poor woman, named Bridget Garrey, was taken before the Magistrates of Limerick last June, charged with vagrancy. She stated that she was born in Tuam, in the county of Galway, in 1812 ; and went to London with her husband in 1833, where she had resided ever since, with the exception of twelve months which she spent at Tuam. In 1848, her husband, who had been a bricklayer, died, and she was left destitute. She applied to the pariah of St. Luke for relief for herself and two chil- dren ; which she received for some months. Since that, the poor woman had striven to gain a living by washing and at times by selling fruit. At the beginning of last summer she was again forced to apply to the work- house, and was admitted for a short time ; but was soon after taken, with her children, against her will, placed on board a steamer, and sent to Limerick. .1The case having been brought under the notice of Mr. Rus- sell, he wrOte to the Poor-law Board ; which elicited an explanation from the Clerk to the St. Luke Guardians. The defence was, that Bridget Garrey and her two children had been chargeable to the parish for years; that an order of Justices for their removal to Ireland had been obtained in February, but that she applied to be discharged rather than go back to Ireland, promising not to apply for relief again. On the faith of that' 'pro- mise she was allowed to go away, but was warned that if she applied again she and her children would be removed under the order to Ireland. On the 21st May, the two children were admitted into the workhouse, without the mother, who had then been committed to prison ; and they remained there till her discharge from prison two days afterwards. On the 24th May, she and her two children having applied to the workhouse again and been admitted, were kept a few days and then sent off to Ireland.

With this explanation the Poor-law Board does not seem to-have been very well satisfied. The Secretary was therefore instructed to write to the Guardians of St. Luke requesting extracts from the books of the re- lieving-officer, showing when and for what periods Bridget Garrey had been in the receipt of relief from the parish of St. Luke ; and whether the allegation that she had resided sixteen years in the parish had been brought under the notice of the Guardians previously to the order for her removal to Ireland. The letter requesting these particulars is dated June 30 ; and is followed by another letter from Whitehall, dated July 19, insisting upon an immediate reply; which was instantly given. The Clerk to the Guardians, without explaining why he had allowed three weeks to elapse without acknowledging the receipt of the letter from.the Poor-law Board, merely stated that Bridget Garrey and her two children " were removed under order of Justices to Ireland, in the usual way ; and that the Guardians do not think it fair that they should be called upon to give information in cases of removal which might possibly be used against them, and therefore respectfully decline to do so." What step the Member for Limerick or the Magistrates of that city may have taken subsequently, does not appear. The only remaining portion of the correspondence, Nos. 9 and 10, is merely a formal letter to Mr. Russell, and a similar one to the Irish Poor-law Commissioners, each enclosing a copy of the correspondence with

the Guardians of St. Luke. Not a word is said about their having committed a breach of the law by sending away a pauper who was not legally removeable if she had even resided but five years in the parish. So far as the correspondence goes, the Poor-law Board seems to have been remiss in allowing the matter to rest where it does. To all ap- pearance, the woman and her children had obtained a settlement in the parish of St. Luke ; and if so, the Guardians had no more right to remove them than they have to ship off the whole of the paupers now in the workhouse under their charge. Their unwillingness to furnish the inform- ation required by the authorities at Whitehall shows that they felt themselves to be in the wrong : but that was only an additional reason for insisting on their giving it, or else for their taking such steps as might bo deemed requisite to repair the wrong they had committed.