You will see, that 15 is the _finest plat of all_. No. 7 is from the
_stout_ straws of the same _kind_ as No. 15. By looking at the parcel of
straw Nos. 7 and 15, you will see what sort of grass this is. The next, in
point of beauty and fineness combined, are the pieces Nos. 13 and 8; and
by looking at the parcel of straw, Nos. 13 and 8, you will see what sort
of grass that is. Next comes 10 and 5, which are very beautiful too; and
the sort of grass, you will see, is the _common Bennet_. The wheat, you
see, is too coarse; and the rest of the sorts are either _too hard_ or
_too brittle_. I beg you to look at Nos. 10 and 5. Those appear to me to
be the thing to supplant the Leghorn. The colour is good, the straws _work
well_, they afford a great _variety of sizes_, and they come from the
common _Bennet grass_, which grows all over the kingdom, which is
cultivated in all our fields, which is in bloom in the fair month of June,
which may be grown as fine or as coarse as we please, and ten acres of
which would, I dare say, make ten thousand bonnets. However, 7 and 15, and
8 and 13, are very good; and they are to be got in every part of the
kingdom.

As to _platters_, it is to be too childish to believe that they are not to
be got, when I could send off these straws, and get back the plat, in the
course of five days. Far _better work_ than this would have been obtained
if I could have gone on the errand myself. What then will people not do,
who regularly undertake the business for their livelihood?

I will, as soon as possible, send you an account of the manner in which I
went to work with the grass. The card or plat, which I sent you some time
ago, you will be so good as to give me back again some time; because I
have now not a bit of the American plat left.

I am, Sir, your most humble and most obedient servant,

WM. COBBETT.

221. I should observe, that these written communications, of mine to the
Society, _belong_, in fact, to it, and will be published in its
PROCEEDINGS, a volume of which comes out every year; but, in this case,
there would have been _a year lost_ to those who may act in consequence of
these communications being made public. The grass is to be got, in great
quantities and of the best sorts, only in _June_ and _July_; and the
Society's volume does not come out till _December_. The Society has,
therefore, given its consent to the making of the communications public
through the means of this little work of mine.

222. Having shown what sort of plat could be produced from English
grass-straw, I next communicated to the Society an account of the method
which I pursued in the cutting and bleaching of the grass. The letter in
which I did this I shall here insert a copy of, before I proceed further.
In the original the paragraphs were _numbered_ from _one_ to _seventeen_:
they are here marked by _letters_, in order to avoid confusion, the
paragraphs of the work itself being marked by _numbers_.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS.

KENSINGTON, April 14, 1823.

A.--SIR,--Agreeably to your request, I now communicate to you a statement
of those particulars which you wished to possess, relative to the
specimens of straw and of plat which I have at different times sent to you
for the inspection of the Society.

B.--That my statement may not come too abruptly upon those members of the
Society who have not had an opportunity of witnessing the progress of this
interesting inquiry, I will take a short review of the circumstances which
led to the making of my experiments.

C.--In the month of June, 1821, a gentleman, a member of the Society,
informed me, by letter, that a Miss WOODHOUSE, a farmer's daughter, of
Weathersfield, in Connecticut, had transmitted to the Society a
straw-bonnet of very fine materials and manufacture; that this bonnet
(according to her account) was made from the straw of a sort of grass
called _poa pratensis_; that it seemed to be unknown whether the same
grass would grow in England; that it was desirable to ascertain whether
this grass would grow in England; that, at all events, it was desirable
to get from America some of the seed of this grass; and that, for this
purpose, my informant, knowing that I had a son in America; addressed
himself to me, it being his opinion that, if materials similar to those
used by Miss WOODHOUSE could by any means be _grown in England_, the
benefit to the nation must be considerable.

D.--In consequence of this application, I wrote to my son James, (then at
New York,) directing him to do what he was able in order to cause success
to the undertaking. On the receipt of my letter, in July, he went from New
York to Weathersfield, (about a hundred and twenty miles;) saw Miss
WOODHOUSE; made the necessary inquiries; obtained a specimen of the grass,
and also of the plat, which other persons at Weathersfield, as well as
Miss WOODHOUSE, were in the habit of making; and having acquired the
necessary information as to cutting the grass and bleaching the straw, he
transmitted to me an account of the matter; which account, together with
his specimens of grass and plat, I received in the month of September.

E.--I was now, when I came to see the specimen of grass, convinced that
Miss WOODHOUSE'S materials could be _grown in England_; a conviction
which, if it had not been complete at once, would have been made complete
immediately afterwards by the sight of a bunch of bonnet-straw _imported
from Leghorn_, which straw was shown to me by the importer, and which I
found to be that of two or three sorts of our common grass, and of oats,
wheat, and rye.

F.--That the grass, or plants, could be _grown in England_ was, therefore,
now certain, and indeed that they were, in point of commonness, next to
the earth itself. But before the grass could, with propriety, be called
materials for bonnet-making, there was the _bleaching_ to be performed;
and it was by no means certain that this could be accomplished by means of
an _English sun_, the difference between which and that of Italy or
Connecticut was well known to be very great.

G.--My experiments have, I presume, completely removed this doubt. I think
that the straw produced by me to the Society, and also some of the pieces
of plat, are of a colour which no straw or plat can surpass. All that
remains, therefore, is for me to give an account of the manner in which I
cut and bleached the grass which I have submitted to the Society in the
state of straw.

H.--First, as to the _season_ of the year, all the straw, except that of
one sort of couch-grass, and the long coppice-grass, which two were got in
Sussex, were got from grass cut in Hertfordshire on the 21st of June. A
grass head-land, in a wheat-field, had been mowed during the forepart of
the day, and in the afternoon I went and took a handful here and a handful
there out of the swaths. When I had collected as much as I could well
carry, I took it to my friend's house, and proceeded to prepare it for
bleaching, according to the information sent me from America by my son;
that is to say, I put my grass into a shallow tub, put boiling water upon
it until it was covered by the water, let it remain in that state for ten
minutes, then took it out, and laid it very thinly on a closely-mowed lawn
in a garden. But I should observe, that, before I put the grass into the
tub, I tied it up in small bundles, or sheaves, each bundle being about
six inches through at the butt-end. This was necessary, in order to be
able to take the grass, at the end of ten minutes, out of the water,
without throwing it into a confused mixture as to tops and tails. Being
tied up in little bundles, I could easily, with a prong, take it out of
the hot water. The bundles were put into a large wicker basket, carried to
the lawn in the garden, and there taken out, one by one, and laid in
swaths as before-mentioned.

I.--It was laid _very thinly_; almost might I say, that no stalk of grass
covered another. The swaths were _turned_ once a day. The bleaching was
completed at the end of _seven days_ from time of scalding and laying
out. June is a fine month. The grass was, as it happened, cut on the
_longest day in the year_; and the weather was remarkably fine and clear.
But the grass which I afterwards cut in Sussex, was cut in the first week
in August; and as to the weather my journal speaks thus:--

  August, 1822.

    2d.--Thunder and rain.--_Began cutting grass._
    3d.--Beautiful day.
   4th.--Fine day.
   5th.--Cloudy day--_Began scalding grass, and laying it out._
   6th.--Cloudy greater part of the day.
   7th.--Same weather.
   8th.--Cloudy and rather misty.--_Finished cutting grass._
   9th.--Dry but cloudy.
  10th.--Very close and hot.--_Packed up part of the grass._
  11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th.--Same weather.
  15th.--Hot and clear.--_Finished packing the grass._

K.--The grass cut in Sussex was as _well bleached_ as that cut in
Hertfordshire; so that it is evident that we never can have a summer that
will not afford sun sufficient for this business.

L.--The part of the straw used for platting; that part of the stalk which
is _above the upper joint_; that part which is between the _upper joint_
and the seed-branches. This part is taken out, and the rest of the straw
thrown away. But the _whole plant must be cut and bleached_; because, if
you were to take off, _when green_, the part above described, that part
would wither up next to nothing. This part must die in company with the
whole plants, and be separated from the other parts after the bleaching
has been performed.

M.--The time of cutting must vary with the seasons, the situation, and the
sort of grass. The grass which I got in Hertfordshire, than which nothing
can, I think, be more beautiful, was, when cut, generally in _bloom_; just
in bloom. The _wheat_ was in full bloom; so that a good time for getting
grass may be considered to be that when the _wheat is in bloom_. When I
cut the grass in Sussex, the _wheat was ripe_, for reaping had begun; but
that grass is of a very backward sort, and, besides, grew in the _shade_
amongst coppice-wood and under trees, which stood pretty thick.

N.--As to the sorts of grass, I have to observe generally, that in
proportion as the colour of the grass is _deep_; that is to say, getting
further from the _yellow_, and nearer to the _blue_, it is of a deep and
_dead yellow_ when it becomes straw. Those kinds of grass are best which
are, in point of colour, nearest to that of wheat, which is a fresh pale
green. Another thing is, the quality of the straw as to _pliancy_ and
_toughness_. Experience must be our guide here. I had not time to make a
large collection of sorts; but those which I have sent to you contain
three sorts which are proved to be good. In my letter of the 3d instant I
sent you _sixteen_ pieces of plat and _eight_ bunches of straw, having the
seed heads on, in order to show the sorts of grass. The sixteenth piece of
plat was American. The first piece was from _wheat_ cut and bleached by
me; the rest from _grass_ cut and bleached by me. I will here, for fear of
mistake, give a list of the names of the several sorts of grass, the straw
of which was sent with my letter of the 3d instant, referring to the
numbers, as placed on the plat and on the bunches of straw.

   PIECES         BUNCHES        SORTS
  OF PLAT.       OF STRAW.      OF GRASS.

  No 1.--         No. 1.        --Wheat.

      2.}                       { Melica Cærulea; or, Purple Melica
      3.}       2 and 3         { Grass.

      4.}                       { Agrostis Stolonifera; or, Fiorin Grass;
     12.}       4 and 12        { that is to say, one sort of Couch-grass.

      5.}
     10.}       5 and 10          Lolium Perenne; or Ray-grass.

      6.}                       { Avena Flavescens; or, Yellow Oat
     11.}       6 and 11        { grass.

      7.}                       { Cynosurus Cristatus; or Crested
     15.}       7 and 15        { Dog's-tail grass.

      8.}                       { Anthoxanthum Odoratum; or, Sweet
     13.}       8 and 13        { scented Vernal grass.

      9.}                       { Agrostis Canina; or, Brown Bent
     14.}       9 and 14        { grass.

O.--These names are those given at the Botanical Garden _at Kew_. But the
same English names are not in the country given to these sorts of grass.
The _Fiorin grass_, the _Yellow Oat-grass_, and the _Brown-Bent_, are all
called _couch-grass_; except that the latter is, in Sussex, called _Red
Robin_. It is the native grass of the _plains_ of Long Island; and they
call it _Red Top_. The _Ray-grass_ is the common field grass, which is,
all over the kingdom, sown with clover. The farmers, in a great part of
the kingdom, call it _Bent_, or _Bennett_, grass; and sometimes it is
galled _Darnel-grass_. The _Crested Dog's-tail_ goes, in Sussex, by the
name of _Hendonbent_; for what reason I know not. The _sweet-scented
Vernal-grass_ I have never, amongst the farmers, heard any name for. Miss
WOODHOUSE'S grass appears, from the _plants_ that I saw in the Adelphi, to
be one of the sorts of Couch-grass. Indeed, I am sure that it is a
Couch-grass, if the plants I there saw came from her seed. My son, who
went into Connecticut, who saw the grass growing, and who sent me home a
specimen of it, is now in England: he was with me when I cut the grass in
Sussex; and he says that Miss WOODHOUSE'S was a Couch-grass. However, it
is impossible to look at the specimens of straw and of plat which I have
sent you, without being convinced that there is no want of the raw
material in England. I was, after my first hearing of the subject, very
soon convinced that the grass grew in England; but I had great doubts as
to the capacity of our _sun_. Those doubts my own experiments have
completely removed; but then I was not aware of the great effect of the
_scalding_, of which, by the way, Miss WOODHOUSE had said nothing, and the
knowledge of which we owe entirely to my son James' journey into
Connecticut.

P.--Having thus given you an account of the time and manner of cutting the
grass, of the mode of cutting and bleaching; having given you the best
account I am able, as to the sorts of grass to be employed in this
business; and having, in my former communications, given you specimens of
the plat wrought from the several sorts of straw, I might here close my
letter; but as it may be useful to speak of _the expense_ of cutting and
bleaching, I shall trouble you with a few words relating to it. If there
were a field of _Ray-grass_, or of _Crested Dog's-tail_, or any other good
sort, and nothing else growing with it, the expense of _cutting_ would be
very little indeed, seeing that the _scythe_ or _reap-hook_ would do the
business at a great rate. Doubtless there _will be_ such fields; but even
if the grass have to be cut by the handful, my opinion is, that the
expense of cutting and bleaching would not exceed _fourpence_ for straw
enough to make a large bonnet. I should be willing to contract to supply
straw, at this rate, for half a million of bonnets. The _scalding_ must
constitute a considerable part of the expense; because there must be
_fresh water_ for every parcel of grass that you put in the tub. When
water has scalded one parcel of cold grass, it will not scald another
parcel. Besides, the scalding draws out the _sweet matter_ of the grass,
and makes the water the colour of that horrible stuff called London
porter. It would be very good, by-the-by, to give to pigs. Many people
give _hay-tea_ to pigs and calves; and this is _grass-tea_. To scald a
large quantity, therefore would require means not usually at hand, and the
scalding is an essential part of the business. Perhaps, in a large and
convenient farm-house, with a good brewing copper, good fuel and water
handy, four or five women might scald a wagon load in a day; and a wagon
would, I think, carry straw enough (in the rough) to furnish the means of
making a thousand bonnets. However, the scalding _might_ take place _in
the field itself_, by means of a portable boiler, especially if water were
at hand; and perhaps it would be better to carry the water to the field
than to carry the grass to the farm-house, for there must be _ground to
lay it out upon the moment it has been scalded_, and no ground can be so
proper as the newly-mowed ground where the grass has stood. The _space_,
too, must be _large_, for any considerable quantity of grass. As to all
these things, however, the best and cheapest methods will soon be
discovered when people set about the work with a view to profit.

Q.--The Society will want nothing from me, nor from any-body else, to
convince it of the importance of this matter; but I cannot, in concluding
these communications to you, Sir, refrain from making an observation or
two on the consequences likely to arise out of these inquiries. The
manufacture is alone of considerable magnitude. Not less than about _five
millions_ of persons in this kingdom have a dress which consists partly of
manufactured straw; and a large part, and all the most expensive part, of
the articles thus used, now come from abroad. In cases where you can get
from abroad any article at _less expense than you can get it at home_, the
wisdom of fabricating that article at home may be doubted. But, in this
case, you get the raw material by labour performed at home, and the cost
of that labour is not nearly so great as would be the cost of the mere
carriage of the straw from a foreign country to this. If our own people
had all plenty of employment, and that too more profitable to them and to
the country than the turning of a part of our own grass into articles of
dress, then it would be advisable still to import Leghorn bonnets; but the
facts being the reverse, it is clear, that whatever money, or money's
worth things, be sent out of the country, in exchange for Leghorn bonnets,
is, while we have the raw material here for next to nothing, just so much
thrown away. The Italians, it may be said, take some of our manufactures
in exchange; and let us suppose, for the purpose of illustration, that
they take cloth from Yorkshire. Stop the exchange between Leghorn and
Yorkshire, and, does Yorkshire _lose part of its custom_? No: for though
those who make the bonnets out of English grass, prevent the Leghorners
from buying Yorkshire cloth, they, with the money which they now get,
instead of its being got by the Leghorners, buy the Yorkshire cloth
themselves; and they wear this cloth too, instead of its being worn by the
people of Italy; ay, Sir, and many, now in rags, will be well clad, if the
laudable object of the Society be effected. Besides this, however, why
should we not _export_ the articles of this manufacture? To America we
certainly should; and I should not be at all surprised if we were to
export them to Leghorn itself.

R.--Notwithstanding all this, however, if the manufacture were of a
description to require, in order to give it success, the _collecting of
the manufacturers together in great numbers_, I should, however great the
wealth that it might promise, never have done any thing to promote its
establishment. The contrary is happily the case: here all is not only
performed _by hand_, but by hand _singly_, without any combination of
hands. Here there is no power of machinery or of chemistry wanted. All is
performed out in the open fields, or sitting in the cottage. There wants
no coal mines and no rivers to assist; no water-powers nor powers of fire.
No part of the kingdom is unfit for the business. Every-where there are
grass, water, sun, and women and children's fingers; and these are all
that are wanted. But, the great thing of all is this; that, to obtain the
materials for the making of this article of dress, at once so gay, so
useful, and in some cases so expensive, there requires not _a penny of
capital_. Many of the labourers now make their own straw hats to wear in
summer. Poor rotten things, made out of straw of ripened grain. With what
satisfaction will they learn that straw, twenty times as durable, to say
nothing of the beauty, is to be got from every hedge? In short when the
people are well and clearly informed of the facts, which I have through
you, Sir, had the honour to lay before the Society, it is next to
impossible that the manufacture should not become general throughout the
country. In every labourer's house a pot of water can be boiled. What
labourer's wife cannot, in the summer months, find time to cut and bleach
grass enough to give her and her children work for a part of the winter?
There is no necessity for all to be _platters_. Some may cut and bleach
only. Others may prepare the straw, as mentioned in paragraph L. of this
letter. And doubtless, as the farmers in Hertfordshire now sell their
straw to the platters, grass collectors and bleachers and preparers would
do the same. So that there is scarcely any country labourer's family that
might not derive some advantage from this discovery; and, while I am
convinced that this consideration has been by no means over-looked by the
Society, it has been, I assure you, the great consideration of all with,

  Sir, your most obedient and
  most humble Servant,
  WM. COBBETT.

223. In the last edition, this closing part of the work, relative to the
straw plat, was not presented to the public as a thing which admitted of
no alteration; but, on the contrary, it was presented to the public with
the following concluding remark: "In conclusion I have to observe, that I
by no means send forth this essay as containing opinions and instructions
that are to undergo no alteration. I am, indeed, endeavouring to teach
others; but I am myself only a learner. Experience will, doubtless, make
me much more perfect in a knowledge of the several parts of the subject;
and the fruit of this experience I shall be careful to communicate to the
public." I now proceed to make good this promise. Experience has proved
that very beautiful and very fine plat can be made of the straw of divers
kinds of _grass_. But the most ample experience has also proved to us that
it is to the straw of _wheat_, that we are to look for a manufacture to
supplant the Leghorn. This was mentioned as a strong suspicion in my
former edition of this work. And I urged my readers to sow wheat for the
purpose. The fact is now proved beyond all contradiction, that the straw
of wheat or rye, but particularly of wheat, is the straw for this purpose.
_Finer_ plat may be made from the straw of grass than can possibly be made
from the straw of wheat or rye: but the grass plat is, all of it, more or
less _brittle_; and none of it has the beautiful and uniform colour of the
straw of wheat. Since the last edition of this work, I have received
packets of the straw _from Tuscany_, all of _wheat_; and, indeed, I am
_convinced_ that no other straw is any-thing like so well calculated for
the purpose. Wheat straw bleaches better than any other. It has that fine,
pale, golden colour which no other straw has; it is much more simple, more
pliant than any other straw; and, in short, this is the material. I did
not urge in vain. A good quantity of wheat was sowed for this purpose. A
great deal of it has been well harvested; and I have the pleasure to know
that several hundreds of persons are now employed in the platting of
straw. One more year; one more crop of wheat; and another Leghorn bonnet
will never be imported in England. Some great errors have been committed
in the sowing of the wheat, and in the cutting of it. I shall now,
therefore, availing myself of the experience which I have gained, offer to
the public some observations on the _sort of wheat_ to be sowed for this
purpose; on the _season_ for sowing; on the _land_ to be used for the
purpose; on the _quantity of seed_, and the _manner_ of sowing: on the
_season_ for cutting; on the manner of _cutting_, _bleaching_, and
_housing_; on the _platting_; on the _knitting_, and on the _pressing_.

224. The SORT OF WHEAT. The Leghorn plat is all made of the straw of the
spring wheat. This spring wheat is so called by us, because it is sowed in
the spring, at the same time that barley is sowed. The botanical name of
it is TRITICUM ÆSTIVUM. It is a small-grained bearded wheat. It has very
fine straw; but experience has convinced me, that the little brown-grained
winter wheat is just as good for the purpose. In short, any wheat will do.
I have now in my possession specimens of plat made of both winter and
spring wheat, and I see no difference at all. I am decidedly of opinion
that the winter wheat is as good as the spring wheat for the purpose. I
have plat, and I have straw both now before me, and the above is the
result of my experience.

225. THE LAND PROPER FOR THE GROWING OF WHEAT. The object is to have the
straw as small as we can get it. The land must not, therefore, be too
rich; yet it ought not to be _very poor_. If it be, you get the straw of
no length. I saw an acre this year, as beautiful as possible, sowed upon a
light loam, which bore last year a fine crop of potatoes. The land ought
to be perfectly clean, at any rate; so that, when the crop is taken off,
the wheat straw may not be mixed with weeds and grass.

226. SEASON FOR SOWING. This will be more conveniently stated in paragraph
228.

227. QUANTITY OF SEED AND MANNER OF SOWING. When first this subject was
started in 1821, I said, in the Register, that I would engage to grow as
fine straw in England as the Italians could grow. I recommended then, as a
first guess, _fifteen_ bushels of wheat to the acre. Since that,
reflection told me that that was not quite enough. I therefore recommended
_twenty_ bushels to the acre. Upon the beautiful acre which I have
mentioned above, eighteen bushels, I am told, were sowed; fine and
beautiful as it was, I think it would have been better if it had had
twenty bushels; twenty bushels, therefore, is what I recommend. You must
sow broad cast, of course, and you must take great pains to cover the seed
well. It must be a good even-handed seedsman, and there must be very nice
covering.

228. SEASON FOR CUTTING. Now, mind, it is fit to cut in just about one
week _after the bloom has dropped_. If you examine the ear at that time,
you will find the grain just beginning to be formed, and that is precisely
the time to cut the wheat: The straw has then got its full substance in
it. But I must now point out a very material thing. It is by no means
desirable to have _all_ your wheat _fit to cut at the same time_. It is a
great misfortune, indeed, so to have it. If fit to cut altogether, it
ought to be cut all at the same time; for supposing you to have an acre,
it will require a fortnight or three weeks to cut it and bleach it, unless
you have a very great number of hands, and very great vessels to prepare
water in. Therefore, if I were to have an acre of wheat for this, purpose,
and were to sow all spring wheat, I would sow a twelfth part of the acre
every week from the first week in March to the last week in May. If I
relied partly upon winter wheat, I would sow some every month, from the
latter end of September to March. If I employed the two sorts of wheat, or
indeed if I employed only the spring wheat, the TRITICUM ÆSTIVUM, I should
have some wheat fit to cut in June, and some not fit to cut till
September. I should be sure to have a fair chance as to the weather. And,
in short, it would be next to impossible for me to fail of securing a
considerable part of my crop. I beg the reader's particular attention to
the contents of this paragraph.

229. MANNER OF CUTTING THE WHEAT. It is cut by a little reap-hook, close
to the ground as possible. It is then tied in little sheaves, with two
pieces of string, one near the butt, and the other about half-way up. This
little bundle or sheaf ought to be six inches through at the butt, and no
more. It ought not to be tied too tightly, lest the scalding should not be
perfect.

230. MANNER OF BLEACHING. The little sheaves mentioned in the last
paragraph are carried to a brewing mash, vat, or other tub. You must not
put them into the tub in too large a quantity, lest the water get chilled
before it get to the bottom. Pour on scalding water till you cover the
whole of the little sheaves, and let the water be a foot above the top
sheaves. When the sheaves have remained thus a full quarter of an hour,
take them out with a prong, lay them in a clothes-basket, or upon a
hurdle, and carry them to the ground where the bleaching is to be
finished. This should be, if possible, a piece of grass land, where the
grass is very short. Take the sheaves, and lay some of them along in a
row; untie them, and lay the straw along in that row as thin as it can
possibly be laid. If it were possible, no one straw ought to have another
lying upon it, or across it. If the sun be clear, it will require to lie
twenty-four hours thus, then to be turned, and lie twenty-four hours on
the other side. If the sun be not very clear, it must lie longer. But the
numerous sowings which I have mentioned will afford you so many chances,
so many opportunities of having fine weather, that the risk about weather
would necessarily be very small. If wet weather should come, and if your
straw remain out in it any length of time, it will be spoiled; but,
according to the mode of sowing above pointed out, you really could stand
very little chance of losing straw by bad weather. If you had some straw
out bleaching, and the weather were to appear suddenly to be about to
change, the quantity that you would have out would not be large enough to
prevent you from putting it under cover, and keeping it there till the
weather changed.

231. HOUSING THE STRAW. When your straw is nicely bleached, gather it up,
and with the same string that you used to tie it when green, tie it up
again into little sheaves. Put it by in some room where there is no
_damp_, and where mice and rats are not suffered to inhabit. Here it is
always ready for use, and it will keep, I dare say, four or five years
very well.

232. THE PLATTING. This is now so well understood that nothing need be
said about the manner of doing the work. But much might be said about the
measures to be pursued by land-owners, by parish officers, by farmers, and
more especially by gentlemen and ladies of sense, public spirit, and
benevolence of disposition. The thing will be done; the manufacture will
spread itself all over this kingdom; but the exertions of those whom I
have here pointed out might hasten the period of its being brought to
perfection. And I beg such gentlemen and ladies to reflect on the vast
importance of such manufacture, which it is impossible to cause to produce
any-thing but good. One of the great misfortunes of England at this day
is, that the land has had _taken away from it those employments for its
women and children which were so necessary to the well-being of the
agricultural labourer_. The spinning, the carding, the reeling, the
knitting; these have been all taken away from the land, and given to the
Lords of the Loom, the haughty lords of bands of abject slaves. But let
the landholder mark how the change has operated to produce his ruin. He
must have the labouring MAN and the labouring BOY; but, alas! he cannot
have these, without having the man's wife, and the boy's mother, and
little sisters and brothers. Even Nature herself says, that he shall have
the wife and little children, or that he shall not have the man and the
boy. But the Lords of the Loom, the crabbed-voiced, hard-favoured,
hard-hearted, puffed-up, insolent, savage and bloody wretches of the North
have, assisted by a blind and greedy Government, taken all the employment
away from the agricultural women and children. This manufacture of Straw
will form one little article of employment for these persons. It sets at
defiance all the hatching and scheming of all the tyrannical wretches who
cause the poor little creatures to die in their factories, heated to
eighty-four degrees. There will need no inventions of WATT; none of your
horse powers, nor water powers; no murdering of one set of wretches in the
coal mines, to bring up the means of murdering another set of wretches in
the factories, by the heat produced from those coals; none of these are
wanted to carry on this manufactory. It wants no _combination_ laws; none
of the inventions of the hard-hearted wretches of the North.

233. THE KNITTING. Upon this subject, I have only to congratulate my
readers that there are great numbers of English women who can now knit,
plat together, better than those famous Jewesses of whom we were told.

234. THE PRESSING. Bonnets and hats are pressed after they are made. I am
told that a proper press costs pretty nearly a hundred pounds; but, then,
that it will do prodigious deal of business. I would recommend to our
friends in the country to teach as many children as they can to make the
plat. The plat will be knitted in London, and in other considerable towns,
by persons to whom it will be sold. It appears to me, at least, that this
will be the course that the thing will take. However, we must leave this
to time; and here I conclude my observations upon a subject which is
deeply interesting to myself, and which the public in general deem to be
of great importance.

235. POSTSCRIPT on _brewing_.--I think it right to say here, that, ever
since I published the instructions for brewing by copper and by wooden
utensils, the beer at _my own house_ has always been brewed precisely
agreeable to the instructions contained in this book; and I have to add,
that I never have had such good beer in my house in all my lifetime, as
since I have followed that mode of brewing. My table-beer, as well as my
ale, is always as clear as wine. I have had hundreds and hundreds of
quarters of malt brewed into beer in my house. My people could always make
it strong enough and sweet enough; but never, except by accident, could
they make it CLEAR. Now I never have any that is not clear. And yet my
utensils are all very small; and my brewers are sometimes one labouring
man, and sometimes another. A man wants showing how to brew the first
time. I should suppose that we use, in my house, about seven hundred
gallons of beer every year, taking both sorts together; and I can
positively assert, that there has not been one drop of bad beer, and
indeed none which has not been most excellent, in my house, during the
last two years, I think it is, since I began using the utensils, and in
the manner named in this book.

ICE-HOUSES.

236. First begging the reader to read again paragraph 149, I proceed here,
in compliance with numerous requests to that effect, to describe, as
clearly as I can, the manner of constructing the sort of Ice-houses
therein mentioned. In England, these receptacles of frozen water are,
generally, _under ground_, and always, if possible, under the _shade of
trees_, the opinion being, that the _main_ thing, if not the _only_ thing,
is to keep away _the heat_. The heat is to be kept away certainly; but
_moisture_ is the great enemy of _Ice_; and how is this to be kept away
either _under ground_, or under the shade of trees? Abundant experience
has proved, that no thickness of _wall_, that no cement of any kind, will
effectually resist _moisture_. Drops will, at times, be seen hanging on
the under side of an arch of any thickness, and made of any materials, if
it have earth over it, and even when it has the floor of a house over it;
and wherever the moisture enters, the ice will quickly melt.

237. Ice-houses should therefore be, in all their parts, _as dry_ as
possible: and they should be so constructed, and the ice so deposited in
them, as to ensure _the running away of the meltings_ as quickly as
possible, whenever such meltings come. Any-thing in way of drains or
gutters, is too slow in its effect; and therefore there must be something
that will not suffer the water proceeding from any melting, to remain an
instant.

238. In the first place, then, the ice-house should stand in a place quite
open to the _sun and air_; for whoever has travelled even but a few miles
(having eyes in his head) need not be told how long that part of a road
from which the sun and wind are excluded by trees, or hedges, or by
any-thing else, will remain wet, or at least damp, after the rest of the
road is even in a state to send up dust.

239. The next thing is to protect the ice against wet, or damp, from
_beneath_. It should, therefore, stand on some spot _from which water
would run in every direction_; and if the natural ground presents no such
spot, it is no very great job to _make it_.

240. Then come the _materials_ of which the house is to consist. These,
for the reasons before-mentioned, must not be bricks, stones, mortar, nor
earth; for these are all affected by the atmosphere; they will become
_damp_ at certain times, and _dampness_ is the great destroyer of ice. The
materials are _wood_ and _straw_. Wood will not do; for, though not liable
to become damp, it imbibes _heat_ fast enough; and, besides, it cannot be
so put together as to shut out air sufficiently. Straw is wholly free from
the quality of becoming damp, except from water actually put upon it; and
it can, at the same time, be placed on a roof, and on sides, to such a
degree of thickness as to exclude the air in a manner the most perfect.
The ice-house ought, therefore, to be made of _posts, plates, rafters,
laths, and straw_. The best form is the _circular_; and the house, when
made, appears as I have endeavoured to describe it in _Fig. 3_ of the
plate.

241. FIG. 1, _a_, is the centre of a circle, the diameter of which is ten
feet, and at this centre you put up a post to stand fifteen feet above the
level of the ground, which post ought to be about nine inches through at
the bottom, and not a great deal smaller at the top. Great care must be
taken that this post be _perfectly perpendicular_; for, if it be not, the
whole building will be awry.

242. _b b b_ are fifteen posts, nine feet high, and six inches through at
the bottom, without much tapering towards the top. These posts stand about
two feet apart, reckoning from centre of post to centre of post, which
leaves between each two a space of eighteen inches, _c c c c_ are
fifty-four posts, five feet high, and five inches through at the bottom,
without much tapering towards the top. These posts stand about two feet
apart, from centre of post to centre of post, which leaves between each
two a space of nineteen inches. The space between these two rows of posts
is four feet in width, and, as will be presently seen, is to contain _a
wall of straw_.

243. _e_ is a passage through this wall; _d_ is the outside door of the
passage; _f_ is the inside door; and the inner circle, of which _a_ is the
centre, is the place in which the ice is to be deposited.

244. Well, then, we have now got _the posts_ up; and, before we talk of
the _roof_ of the house, or of the _bed_ for the ice, it will be best to
speak about the making of the _wall_. It is to be made of _straw_,
wheat-straw, or rye-straw, with no rubbish in it, and made very smooth by
the hand as it is put in. You lay it _in very closely_ and very smoothly,
so that if the wall were cut across, as at _g g_, in FIG. 2 (which FIG.
2 represents _the whole building cut down through the middle_, omitting
the centre post,) the ends of the straws would present a compact face as
they do after a cut of a chaff-cutter. But there requires something _to
keep the straw from bulging out between the posts_. Little stakes as big
as your _wrist_ will answer this purpose. Drive them into the ground, and
fasten, at top, to the _plates_, of which I am now to speak. The plates
are pieces of wood which go all round both the circles, and are _nailed on
upon the tops of the posts_. Their main business is to receive and sustain
the _lower ends of the rafters_, as at _m m_ and _n n_ in FIG. 2. But to
the plates also the _stakes_ just mentioned must be fastened at top. Thus,
then, there will be this space of four feet wide, having, on each side of
it, a row of posts and stakes, not more than about six inches from each
other, to hold up, and to keep in its place, this wall of straw.

[Illustration: _Fig. 1_, _Fig. 2_, _Fig. 3_]

245. Next come the _rafters_, as from _s_ to _n_, FIG. 2. Carpenters best
know what is the _number_ and what the _size_ of the rafters; but from _s_
to _m_ there need be only about half as many as from _m_ to _n_. However,
carpenters know all about this. It is their every-day work. The roof is
forty-five _degrees pitch_, as the carpenters call it. If it were even
_sharper_, it would be none the worse. There will be about _thirty_ ends
of rafters to lodge on the plate, as at _m_; and these cannot _all_ be
fastened to the top of the centre-post rising up from _a_; but carpenters
know how to manage this matter, so as to make all strong and safe. The
_plate_ which goes along on the tops of the row of posts, _b b b_, must,
of course, be put on in a somewhat sloping form; otherwise there would be
a sort of _hip_ formed by the rafters. However, the thatch is to be so
deep, that this may not be of much consequence. Before the thatching
begins, there are _laths_ to put upon the rafters. Thatchers know all
about this, and all that you have to do is, to take care that the thatcher
_tie the straw on well_. The best way, in a case of such deep thatch, is
to have _a strong man to tie for the thatcher_.

246. The roof is now _raftered_, and it is to receive a thatch of _clean_,
_sound_, and well-prepared wheat or rye straw, four _feet thick_, as at _h
h_ in FIG. 2.

247. The house having now got _walls_ and _roof_, the next thing is to
make the _bed_ to receive the ice. This bed is the area of the circle of
which _a_ is the centre. You begin by laying on the ground _round logs_,
eight inches through, or thereabouts, and placing them across the area,
leaving spaces between them of about a foot. Then, _crossways on them_,
poles about four inches through, placed at six inches apart. Then,
_crossways on them_, other poles, about two inches through, placed at
three inches apart. Then, _crossways on them_, rods as thick as your
finger, placed at an inch apart. Then upon these, small, clean, dry,
last-winter-cut _twigs_, to the thickness of about two inches; or, instead
of these twigs, good, clean, strong _heath_, free from grass and moss, and
from rubbish of all sorts.

248. This is the _bed_ for the ice to lie on; and as you see, the top of
the bed will be seventeen inches from the ground. The pressure of the ice
may, perhaps, bring it to fourteen, or to thirteen. Upon this bed the ice
is put, broken and pummelled, and beaten down together in the usual
manner.

249. Having got the bed filled with ice, we have next to _shut it safely
up_. As we have seen, there is a passage (_e_). Two feet wide is enough
for this passage; and, being as long as the wall is thick, it is of
course, four feet long. The use of the passage is this: that you may have
_two doors_, so that you may, in hot or damp weather, shut the outer door,
while you have the inner door open. This inner door may be of hurdle-work,
and straw, and covered, on one of the sides, with sheep-skins with the
_wool on_, so as to keep out the external air. The outer-door, which must
lock, must be of wood, made to shut very closely, and, besides, covered
with skins like the other. At times of great danger from heat, or from
wet, the whole of the passage may be filled with straw. The door (_p._
FIG. 3) should face the North, or between North and East.

250. As to the _size_ of the ice-house, that must, of course, depend upon
the _quantity_ of ice that you may choose to have. A house on the above
scale, is from _w_ to _x_ (FIG. 2) twenty-nine feet; from _y_ to _z_ (FIG.
2) nineteen feet. The area of the circle, of which _a_ is the centre, is
ten feet in diameter, and as this area contains seventy-five superficial
feet, you will, if you put ice on the bed to the height of only five feet,
(and you _may_ put it on to the height of seven feet from the top of the
bed,) you will have _three hundred and seventy-five cubic feet of ice_;
and, observe, a cubic foot of ice will, when broken up, fill much more
than a _Winchester Bushel_: what it may do as to an "IMPERIAL BUSHEL,"
engendered like Greek Loan Commissioners, by the unnatural heat of
"PROSPERITY," God only knows! However, I do suppose, that, without making
any allowance for the "_cold_ fit," as Dr. Baring calls it, into which
"_late_ panic" has brought us; I do suppose, that even the scorching, the
burning dog-star of "IMPERIAL PROSPERITY;" nay, that even DIVES himself,
would hardly call for more than two bushels of ice in a day; for more than
two bushels a day it would be, unless it were used in cold as well as in
hot weather.

251. As to the _expense_ of such a house, it could, in the country, not be
much. None of the posts, except the main or centre-post, need be _very
straight_. The other posts might be easily culled from tree-lops, destined
for fire-wood. The straw would _make all straight_. The _plates_ must of
necessity be short pieces of wood; and, as to the _stakes_, the _laths_,
and the _logs_, _poles_, _rods_, _twigs_, and _heath_, they would not all
cost _twenty shillings_. The straw is the principal article; and, in most
places, even that would not cost more than two or three pounds. If it last
many years, the price could not be an object; and if but a little while,
it would still be nearly as good for litter as it was before it was
applied to this purpose. How often the _bottom of the straw walls_ might
want renewing I cannot say, but I know that the roof would with few and
small repairs, last well for ten years.

252. I have said that the interior row of posts is to be nine feet high,
and the exterior row five feet high. I, in each case, mean, _with the
plate inclusive_. I have only to add, that by way of superabundant
precaution against bottom wet, it will be well to make a sort of _gutter_,
to receive the drip from the roof, and to carry it away as soon as it
falls.

253. Now, after expressing a hope that I shall have made myself clearly
understood by every reader, it is necessary that I remind him, that I do
not pretend to pledge myself for the complete success, nor for any success
at all, of this mode of making ice-houses. But, at the same time, I
express my firm belief, that complete success would attend it; because it
not only corresponds with what I have seen of such matters; but I had the
details from a gentleman who had ample experience to guide him, and who
was a man on whose word and judgment I placed a perfect reliance. He
advised me to erect an ice-house; but not caring enough about _fresh meat_
and _fish_ in summer, or at least not setting them enough above "_prime
pork_" to induce me to take any trouble to secure the former, I never
built an ice-house. Thus, then, I only communicate that in which I
believe; there is, however, in all cases, this comfort, that if the thing
fail as an ice-house, it will serve all generations to come as a model for
a pig-bed.

ADDITION.

_Kensington, Nov. 14th, 1831._

MANGEL WURZEL.

254. This last summer, I have proved that, as keep for cows, MANGEL WURZEL
is preferable to SWEDISH TURNIPS, whether as to quantity or quality. But
there needs no other alteration in the book, than merely to read _mangel
wurzel_ wherever you find _Swedish turnip_; the time of sowing, the mode
and time of transplanting, the distances, and the cultivation, all being
the same; and the only difference being in the _application of the
leaves_, and in _the time of harvesting_ the roots.

255. The leaves of the MANGEL WURZEL are of great value, especially in dry
summers. You begin, about the third week in August, to take off by a
_downward pull_, the leaves of the plants; and they are excellent food for
pigs and cows; only observe this, that, if given to cows, there must be,
for each cow, _six pounds of hay a day_, which is not necessary in the
case of the Swedish turnips. These leaves last till the crop is taken up,
which ought to be in the _first week of November_. The taking off of the
leaves does good to the plants: new leaves succeed higher up; and the
plant becomes _longer_ than it otherwise would be, and, of course,
_heavier_. But, in taking off the leaves, you must not approach too near
to the top.

256. When you take the plants up in November, you must cut off the
_crowns_ and the remaining leaves; and they, again, are for cows and pigs.
Then you put the roots into some place to keep them from the frost; and,
if you have no place under cover, put them in _pies_, in the same manner
as directed for the Swedish turnips. The roots will average in weight 10
_lbs. each_. They may be given to cows _whole_, or to pigs either, and
they are better than the Swedish turnip for both animals; and they do not
give any bad or strong taste to the milk and butter. But, besides this use
of the mangel wurzel, there is another, with regard to pigs at least, of
very great importance. The _juice_ of this plant has so much of
_sweetness_ in it, that, in France, they make _sugar_ of it; and have used
the sugar, and found it equal in goodness to West India sugar. Many
persons in England make _beer_ of this juice, and I have drunk of this
beer, and found it very good. In short, the juice is most excellent for
the mixing of moist food for pigs. I am now (20th Nov. 1831) boiling it
for this purpose. My copper holds seven strike-bushels; I put in three
bushels of mangel wurzel cut into pieces two inches thick, and then fill
the copper with water. I draw off as much of the liquor as I want to wet
pollard, or meal, for little pigs or fatting-pigs, and the rest, roots and
all, I feed the _yard-hogs_ with; and this I shall follow on till about
the middle of May.

257. If you give boiled, or steamed, _potatoes_ to pigs, there wants some
liquor to mix with the potatoes; for the water in which potatoes have been
boiled is _hurtful_ to any animal that drinks it. But mix the potatoes
with juice of mangel wurzel, and they make very good food for hogs of all
ages. The mangel wurzel produces _a larger_ crop than the Swedish turnip.

COBBETT'S CORN.

258. IF you prefer _bread_ and _pudding_ to milk, butter, and meat, this
corn will produce, on your forty rods, forty bushels, each weighing 60
_lbs. at the least_; and more flour, in proportion, than the best white
wheat. To make _bread_ with it you must use _two-thirds_ wheaten, or rye,
flour; but in puddings this is not necessary. The puddings at my house are
all made with this flour, except meat and fruit pudding; for the corn
flour is not adhesive or _clinging_ enough to make paste, or crust. This
corn is the very best for hog-fatting in the whole world. I, last April,
sent parcels of the seed into several counties, to be given away to
working men: and I sent them instructions for the cultivation, which I
shall repeat here.

259. I will first describe this _corn_ to you. It is that which is
sometimes called _Indian corn_; and sometimes people call it Indian wheat.
It is that sort of corn which the disciples ate as they were going up to
Jerusalem on the Sabbath-day. They gathered it in the fields as they went
along and ate it green, they being "an hungered," for which you know they
were reproved by the pharisees. I have written a treatise on this corn in
a book which I sell for four shillings, giving a minute account of the
qualities, the culture, the harvesting, and the various uses of this corn;
but I shall here confine myself to what is necessary for a labourer to
know about it, so that he may be induced to raise and may be enabled to
raise enough of it in his garden to fat a pig of ten score.

260. There are a great many sorts of this corn. They all come from
countries which are hotter than England. This sort, which my eldest son
brought into England, is a dwarf kind, and is the only kind that I have
known to ripen in this country: and I know that it will ripen in this
country in any summer; for I had a large field of it in 1828 and 1829; and
last year (my lease at my farm being out at Michaelmas, and this corn not
ripening till late in October) I had about two acres in my garden at
Kensington. Within the memory of man there have not been three summers so
cold as the last, one after another; and no one so cold as the last. Yet
my corn ripened perfectly well, and this you will be satisfied of if you
be amongst the men to whom this corn is given from me. You will see that
it is in the shape of the cone of a spruce fir; you will see that the
grains are fixed round a stalk which is called the _cob_. These _stalks_
or _ears_ come out of the side of the plant, which has leaves like a flag,
which plant grows to about three feet high, and has two or three and
sometimes more, of these ears or bunches of grain. Out of the top of the
plant comes the tassel, which resembles the plumes of feathers upon a
hearse; and this is the flower of the plant.

261. The grain is, as you will see, about the size of a large pea, and
there are from two to three hundred of these grains upon the ear, or cob.
In my treatise, I have shown that, in America, all the hogs and pigs, all
the poultry of every sort, the greater part of the oxen, and a
considerable part of the sheep, are fatted upon this corn; that it is the
best food for horses; and that, when ground and dressed in various ways,
it is used in bread, in puddings, in several other ways in families; and
that, in short, it is the real staff of life, in all the countries where
it is in common culture, and where the climate is hot. When used for
poultry, the grain is rubbed off the cob. Horses, sheep, and pigs, bite
the grain off, and leave the cob; but horned cattle eat cob and all.

262. I am to speak of it to you, however, only as a thing to make you some
bacon, for which use it surpasses all other grain whatsoever. When the
grain is in the whole ear, it is called corn in the ear; when it is rubbed
off the cob, it is called shelled corn. Now, observe, ten bushels of
shelled corn are equal, in the fatting of a pig, to fifteen bushels of
barley; and fifteen bushels of barley, if properly ground and managed,
will make a pig of ten score, if he be not too poor when you begin to fat
him. Observe that everybody who has been in America knows, that the finest
hogs in the world are fatted in that country; and no man ever saw a hog
fatted in that country in any other way than tossing the ears of corn over
to him in the sty, leaving him to bite it off the ear, and deal with it
according to his pleasure. The finest and solidest bacon in the world is
produced in this way.

263. Now, then, I know, that a bushel of shelled corn may be grown upon
one single rod of ground sixteen feet and a half each way; I have grown
more than that this last summer; and any of you may do the same if you
will strictly follow the instructions which I am now about to give you.

1. Late in March (I am doing it now,) or in the first fortnight of April,
dig your ground up _very deep_, and let it lie rough till between the
seventh and fifteenth of May.

2. Then (in dry weather if possible) dig up the ground again, and make it
smooth at top. Draw drills with a line two feet apart, just as you do
drills for peas; rub the grains off the cob; put a little very rotten and
fine manure along the bottom of the drill; lay the grains along upon that
six inches apart; cover the grain over with fine earth, so that there be
about an inch and a half on the top of the grain; pat the earth down a
little with the back of a hoe to make it lie solid on the grain.

3. If there be any danger of slugs, you must kill them before the corn
comes up if possible: and the best way to do this is to put a little hot
lime in a bag, and go very early in the morning, and shake the bag all
round the edges of the ground and over the ground. Doing this three or
four times very early in a dewy morning, or just after a shower, will
destroy all the slugs; and this ought to be done for all other crops as
well as for that of corn.

4. When the corn comes up, you must take care to keep all birds off till
it is two or three inches high; for the spear is so sweet, that the birds
of all sorts are very apt to peck it off, particularly the doves and the
larks and pigeons. As soon as it is fairly above ground, give the whole of
the ground (in dry weather) a flat hoeing, and be sure to move all the
ground close round the plants. When the weeds begin to appear again, give
the ground another hoeing, but always in dry weather. When the plants get
to be about a foot high or a little more, dig the ground between the rows,
and work the earth up a little against the stems of the plants.

5. About the middle of August you will see the tassel springing up out of
the middle of the plant, and the ears coming out of the sides. If weeds
appear in the ground, hoe it again to kill the weeds, so that the ground
may be always kept clean. About the middle of September you will find the
grains of the ears to be full of milk, just in the state that the ears
were at Jerusalem when the disciples cropped them to eat. From this milky
state, they, like the grains of wheat, grow hard; and as soon as the
grains begin to be hard, you should cut off the tops of the corn and the
long flaggy leaves, and leave the ears to ripen upon the stalk or stem. If
it be a warm summer, they will be fit to harvest by the last of October;
but it does not signify if they remain out until the middle of November or
even later. The longer they stay out, the harder the grain will be.

6. Each ear is covered in a very curious manner with a husk. The best way
for you will be, when you gather in your crop to strip off the husks, to
tie the ears in bunches of six or eight or ten, and to hang them up to
nails in the walls, or against the beams of your house; for there is so
much moisture in the cob that the ears are apt to heat if put together in
great parcels. The room in which I write in London is now hung all round
with bunches of this corn. The bunches may be hung up in a shed or stable
for a while, and, when perfectly dry, they may be put into bags.

7. Now, as to the mode of _using_ the corn; if for poultry, you must rub
the grains off the cob; but if for pigs, give them the whole ears. You
will find some of the ears in which the grain is still soft. Give these to
your pig first; and keep the hardest to the last. You will soon see how
much the pig will require in a day, because pigs, more decent than many
rich men, never eat any more than is necessary to them. You will thus have
a pig; you will have two flitches of bacon, two pig's cheeks, one set of
souse, two griskins, two spare-ribs, from both which I trust in God you
will keep the jaws of the Methodist parson; and if, while you are drinking
a mug of your own ale, after having dined upon one of these, you drink my
health, you may be sure that it will give you more merit in the sight of
God as well as of man, than you would acquire by groaning the soul out of
your body in responses to the blasphemous cant of the sleekheaded
Methodist thief that would persuade you to live upon potatoes.

264. You must be quite sensible that I cannot have any motive but your
good in giving you this advice, other than the delight which I take and
the pleasure which I derive from doing that good. You are all personally
unknown to me: in all human probability not one man in a thousand will
ever see me. You have no more power to show your gratitude to me than you
have to cause me to live for a hundred years. I do not desire that you
should deem this a favour received from me. The thing is worth your
trying, at any rate.

265. The corn is off by the middle of November. The ground should then be
well manured, and deeply dug, and planted with EARLY YORK, or EARLY DWARF
CABBAGES, which will be _loaved_ in the _latter end of April_, and may be
either sold or given to pigs, or cows, _before the time to plant the corn
again_. Thus you have two very large crops on the same ground in the same
year.

INDEX.

                                     PARAGRAPH

  Agur                                      18

  Bees                                     160

  Bread, making of                          77

  Brewing Beer                         20, 108
    _See also_ "POSTSCRIPT."

  Brewing-machine                           41

  Brougham, Mr.                             41

  Candles and Rushes                       199

  Castlereagh's and Mackintosh's Oratory   152

  Combination Laws                         108

  Corn, Cobbett                            258

  Cows, keeping                            111

  Cusar, Mr.                                86

  Custom Laws                              108

  Drennen, Dr.                              80

  Dress, Household Goods, and Fuel         199

  Ducks                                    169

  Economy, meaning of the term            2, 3

  Education                                 11

  Ellman, Mr.                           20, 60

  Excise Laws                              108

  Fowls                                    176

  Geese                                    167

  Goats and Ewes                           189

  Hanning, Mr. Wm.                          99

  Hill, Mr.                                 98

  Hops                                     202

  Ice-houses                               236

  Leghorn                                  212

  Libel Laws                               108

  Malthus, Parson                          141

  Mangel Wurzel                            254

  Mustard                                  198

  Parks, Mr.                                98

  Paul, Saint                              148

  Peel's flimsy Dresses                    152

  Pigeons                                  181

  Pigs, keeping                            139

  Pitt's false Money                       152

  Plat, English Straw                      208

  Porter, how to make                       71

  Potatoes                                  77

  Rabbits                                  184

  Salting Mutton and Beef                  157

  Stanhope, Lord                           144

  Swedish Turnips                          207

  Turkeys                                  171

  Walter's and Stoddart's Paragraphs       152

  Walter Scott's Poems                     152

  Want, the Parent of Crime                 18

  Wakefield, Mr. Edward                 78, 99

  Wilberforce's Potatoe-Diet               152

  Winchelsea, Lord.                        144

  Woodhouse, Miss                          213

  Yeast                                    203

  COBBETT'S
  POOR MAN'S FRIEND;

  A DEFENCE OF THE RIGHTS OF THOSE WHO DO
  THE WORK, AND FIGHT THE BATTLES.

COBBETT'S POOR MAN'S FRIEND.

NUMBER I.

TO THE WORKING CLASSES OF PRESTON.

_Burghclere, Hampshire, 22d August, 1826._

MY EXCELLENT FRIENDS,

1. Amongst all the new, the strange, the unnatural, the monstrous things
that mark the present times, or, rather, that have grown out of the
present system of governing this country, there is, in my opinion, hardly
any thing more monstrous, or even so monstrous, as the language that is
now become fashionable, relative to the condition and the treatment of
that part of the community which are usually denominated the POOR; by
which word I mean to designate the persons who, from age, infirmity,
helplessness, or from want of the means of gaining anything by labour,
become destitute of a sufficiency of food or of raiment, and are in danger
of perishing if they be not relieved. Such are the persons that we mean
when we talk of THE POOR; and, I repeat, that amongst all the monstrous
things of these monstrous days, nothing is, in my opinion, so monstrous as
the language which we now constantly hear relative to the condition and
treatment of this part of the community.

2. Nothing can be more common than to read, in the newspapers,
descriptions the most horrible of the sufferings of _the Poor_, in various
parts of England, but particularly in the North. It is related of them,
that they eat horse-flesh, grains, and have been detected in eating out of
pig-troughs. In short, they are represented as being far worse fed and
worse lodged than the greater part of the pigs. These statements of the
_newspapers_ may be false, or, at least, only partially true; but, at a
public meeting of rate-payers, at Manchester, on the 17th of August, Mr.
BAXTER, the Chairman, said, that some of the POOR had been _starved to
death_, and that _tens of thousands were upon the point of starving_; and,
at the same meeting, Mr. POTTER gave a detail, which showed that Mr.
BAXTER'S general description was true. Other accounts, very nearly
official, and, at any rate, being of unquestionable authenticity, concur
so fully with the statements made at the Manchester Meeting, that it is
impossible not to believe, that a great number of thousands of persons are
now on the point of perishing for want of food, and _that many have
actually perished from that cause_; and that this has taken place, and is
taking place, IN ENGLAND.

3. There is, then, no doubt of the existence of the disgraceful and horrid
facts; but that which is as horrid as are the facts themselves, and even
more horrid than those facts, is the cool and _unresentful_ language and
manner in which the facts are usually spoken of. Those who write about the
misery and starvation in Lancashire and Yorkshire, never appear to think
_that any body is to blame_, even when the poor die with hunger. The
Ministers ascribe the calamity to "_over-trading_;" the cotton and cloth
and other master-manufacturers ascribe it to "_a want of paper-money_," or
to the _Corn-Bill_; others ascribe the calamity to the _taxes_. These last
are right; but what have these things to do with the treatment of the
poor? What have these things to do with the horrid facts relative to the
condition and starvation of English people? It is very true, that the
enormous taxes which we pay on account of loans made to carry on the late
unjust wars, on account of a great standing army in time of peace, on
account of pensions, sinecures and grants, and on account of _a Church_,
which, besides, swallows up so large a part of the produce of the land
and the labour; it is very true, that these enormous taxes, co-operating
with the paper-money and its innumerable monopolies; it is very true, that
_these enormous taxes_, thus associated, have produced the ruin in trade,
manufactures and commerce, and have, of course, produced the _low wages_
and the _want of employment_; this is very true; but it is not less true,
that, be wages or employment as they may, the poor are not to perish with
hunger, or with cold, while the rest of the community have food and
raiment more than the latter want for their own sustenance. The LAW OF
ENGLAND says, that there shall be no person to suffer from want of food
and raiment. It has placed _officers_ in every parish to see that no
person suffer from this sort of want; and lest these officers should not
do their duty, _it commands all the magistrates_ to hear the complaints of
the poor, and to compel the officers to do their duty. The LAW OF ENGLAND
has provided ample means of relief for the poor; for, it has authorized
the officers, or overseers, to get from the rich inhabitants of the parish
as much money as _is wanted_ for the purpose, without any limit as to
amount; and, in order that the overseers may have no excuse of inability
to make people pay, the law has armed them with powers of a nature the
most efficacious and the most efficient and most prompt in their
operation. In short, the language of the LAW, to the overseer, is this:
"Take care that no person suffer from hunger, or from cold; and that you
may be sure not to fail of the means of obeying this my command, I give
you, as far as shall be necessary for this purpose, full power over all
the lands, all the houses, all the goods, and all the cattle, in your
parish." To the Justices of the Peace the LAW says: "Lest the overseer
should neglect his duty; lest, in spite of my command to him, any one
should suffer from hunger or cold, I command you to be ready to hear the
complaint of every sufferer from such neglect; I command you to summon the
offending overseer, and to compel him to do his duty."

4. Such being the language of the LAW, is it not a monstrous state of
things, when we hear it commonly and coolly stated, that many thousands of
persons in England are _upon the point of starvation_; that _thousands
will die of hunger and cold next winter_; that many have _already died of
hunger_; and when we hear all this, unaccompanied with one word of
_complaint against any overseer_, or any _justice of the peace_! Is not
this state of things perfectly monstrous? A state of things in which it
appears to be taken for granted, that the LAW is nothing, when it is
intended to operate as a protection to the poor! Law is always law: if one
part of the law may be, with impunity, set at defiance, why not another
and every other part of the law? If the law which provides for the succour
of the poor, for the preservation of their lives, may be, with impunity,
set at defiance, why should there not be impunity for setting at defiance
the law which provides for the security of the property and the lives of
the rich? If you, in Lancashire, were to read, in an account of a meeting
in Hampshire, that, here, the farmers and gentlemen were constantly and
openly robbed; that the poor were daily breaking into their houses, and
knocking their brains out; and that it was expected that great part of
them would be killed very soon: if you, in Lancashire were to hear this
said of the state of Hampshire, what would you say? Say! Why, you would
say, to be sure, "Where is the LAW; where are the constables, the
justices, the juries, the judges, the sheriffs, and the hangmen? Where can
that _Hampshire_ be? It, surely, never can be in Old England. It must be
some savage country, where such enormities can be committed, and where
even those, who talk and who _lament_ the evils, never utter one word in
the way of _blame_ of the perpetrators." And if you were called upon to
pay taxes, or to make subscriptions in money, to furnish the means of
protection to the unfortunate rich people in Hampshire, would you not say,
and with good reason, "No: what should we do this for? The people of
Hampshire have the SAME LAW that we have; they are under the same
Government; _let them duly enforce that law_; and then they will stand in
no need of money from us to provide for their protection."

5. This is what common sense says would be _your_ language in such a case;
and does not common sense say, that the people of Hampshire, and of every
other part of England, will thus think, when they are told of the
sufferings, and the starvation, in Lancashire and Yorkshire! The report of
the Manchester ley-payers, which took place on the 17th of August, reached
me in a friend's house in this little village; and when another friend,
who was present, read, in the speeches of Mr. BAXTER and Mr. POTTER, that
tens of thousands of Lancashire people were _on the point of starvation_,
and that many had already _actually died from starvation_; and when he
perceived, that even those gentlemen uttered not a word of _complaint_
against either overseer or justices of the peace, he exclaimed: "What! are
there _no poor-laws_ in Lancashire? Where, amidst all this starvation, is
the overseer? Where is the justice of the peace? Surely that Lancashire
can never be _in England_?"

6. The observations of this gentleman are those which occur to every man
of sense; when he hears the horrid accounts of the sufferings in the
manufacturing districts; for, though we are all well aware, that the
burden of the poor-rates presses, at this time, with peculiar weight on
the land-owners and occupiers, and on owners and occupiers of other real
property, in those districts, we are equally well aware, that those owners
and occupiers _have derived great benefits_ from that vast population that
now presses upon them. There is _land_ in the parish in which I am now
writing, and belonging to the farm in the house of which I am, which land
would not let for 20_s._ a statute acre; while land, not so good, would
let, in any part of Lancashire, near to the manufactories, at 60_s._ or
80_s._ a statute acre. The same may be said with regard to _houses_. And,
pray, are the owners and occupiers, who have gained so largely by the
manufacturing works being near their lands and houses; are they, _now_, to
complain, if the vicinage of these same works causes a charge of rates
_there_, heavier than exists _here_? Are the owners and occupiers of
Lancashire to enjoy _an age of advantages_ from the labours of the
spinners and the weavers; and are they, when a reverse comes, _to bear
none of the disadvantages_? Are they to make no sacrifices, in order to
save from perishing those industrious and ever-toiling creatures, by the
labours of whom their land and houses have been augmented in value, three,
five, or perhaps tenfold? None but the most unjust of mankind can answer
these questions in the affirmative.

7. But as _greediness_ is never at a loss for excuses for the
hard-heartedness that it is always ready to practise, it is said, that
_the whole of the rents_ of the land and the houses would not suffice for
the purpose; that is to say, that if the poor rates were to be made so
high as to leave the tenant no means of paying rent, even then some of the
poor must go without a sufficiency of food. I have no doubt that, in
particular instances, this would be the case. But for cases like this the
LAW has amply provided; for, in every case of this sort, _adjoining
parishes_ may be made to _assist_ the hard pressed parish; and if the
pressure becomes severe on these adjoining parishes, those _next adjoining
them_ may be made to assist; and thus the call upon adjoining parishes
maybe extended till it reach _all over the county_. So good, so benignant,
so wise, so foreseeing, and so effectual, is this, the very best of all
our good old laws! This law or rather code of laws, distinguishes England
from all the other countries in the world, _except the United States of
America_, where, while hundreds of other English statutes have been
abolished, this law has always remained in full force, this great law of
mercy and humanity, which says, that _no human being that treads English
ground shall perish for want of food and raiment_. For such poor persons
as are _unable to work_, the law provides food and clothing; and it
commands that _work_ shall be provided for such as are able to work, and
_cannot otherwise get employment_. This law was passed more than _two
hundred years_ ago. Many attempts have been made to _chip it away_, and
some have been made to destroy it altogether; but it still exists, and
every man who does not wish to see general desolation take place, will do
his best to cause it to be duly and conscientiously executed.

8. Having now, my friends of Preston, stated what the law is, and also the
reasons for its honest enforcement in the particular case immediately
before us, I will next endeavour to show you that it is founded in the law
of nature, and that, were it not for the provisions of this law, people
would, according to the opinions of the greatest lawyers, have _a right_
to _take_ food and raiment sufficient to preserve them from perishing; and
that _such taking_ would be neither _felony_ nor _larceny_. This is a
matter of the greatest importance; it is a most momentous question; for if
it be settled in the affirmative--if it be settled that it is _not felony,
nor larceny,_ to take other men's goods without their assent, and even
against their will, when such taking is absolutely necessary to the
preservation of life, how great, how imperative, is the duty of affording,
if possible, _that relief which will prevent such necessity_! In other
words, how imperative it is on all overseers and justices to obey the law
with alacrity; and how weak are those persons who look to "_grants_" and
"_subscriptions_," to supply the place of the execution of this, the most
important of all the laws that constitute the basis of English society!
And if this question be settled in the affirmative; if we find the most
learned of lawyers and most wise of men, maintaining the affirmative of
this proposition; if we find them maintaining, that it is neither _felony_
nor _larceny_ to take food, in case of _extreme necessity_, though without
the assent, and even against the will of the owner, what are we to think
of those (and they are not few in number nor weak in power) who, animated
with the savage soul of the Scotch _feelosophers_, would wholly abolish
the poor-laws, or, at least, render them of little effect, and thereby
constantly keep thousands exposed to this dire necessity!

9. In order to do justice to this great subject; in order to treat it with
perfect fairness, and in a manner becoming of me and of you, I must take
the authorities _on both sides_. There are some great lawyers who have
contended that the starving man is still guilty of felony or larceny, if
he take food to satisfy his hunger; but there are a greater number of
other, and still greater, lawyers, who maintain the contrary. The general
doctrine of those who maintain the right to take, is founded on the law of
nature; and it is a saying as old as the hills, a saying in every language
in the world, that "_self-preservation_ is the _first law_ of nature." The
law of nature teaches every creature to prefer the preservation of its own
life to all other things. But, in order to have a fair view of the matter
before us, we ought to inquire how it came to pass, that the laws were
ever made to punish men as criminals, for taking the victuals, drink, or
clothing, that they might stand in need of. We must recollect, then, that
there was a time when no such laws existed; when men, like the wild
animals in the fields, took what they were able to take, if they wanted
it. In this state of things, all the land and all the produce belonged to
all the people _in common_. Thus were men situated, when they lived under
what is called the _law of nature_; when every one provided, as he could,
for his self-preservation.

10. At length this state of things became changed: men entered into
society; they made laws to restrain individuals from following, in certain
cases, the dictates of their own will; they protected the weak against the
strong; the laws secured men in possession of lands, houses, and goods,
that were called THEIRS; the words MINE and THINE, which mean _my own_ and
_thy own_, were invented to designate what we now call _a property_ in
things. The law necessarily made it criminal in one man to take away, or
to injure, the property of another man. It was, you will observe, even in
this state of nature, always _a crime_ to do certain things against our
neighbour. To kill him, to wound him, to slander him, to expose him to
suffer from the want of food or raiment, or shelter. These, and many
others, were crimes in the eye of the law of nature; but, to take share of
a man's victuals or clothing; to go and insist upon sharing a part of any
of the good things that he happened to have in his possession, could be
_no crime_, because there was _no property_ in anything, except in man's
body itself. Now, civil society was formed for the _benefit_ of the whole.
The whole gave up their natural rights, in order that every one might, for
the future, enjoy his life in greater security. This civil society was
intended to change the state of man _for the better_. Before this state of
civil society, the starving, the hungry, the naked man, had a right to go
and provide himself with necessaries wherever he could find them. There
would be sure to be some such necessitous persons in a state of civil
society. Therefore, when civil society was established, it is impossible
to believe that it _had not in view some provision for these destitute
persons_. It would be monstrous to suppose the contrary. The contrary
supposition would argue, that fraud was committed upon the mass of the
people in forming this civil society; for, as the sparks fly upwards, so
will there always be destitute persons to some extent or other, in _every
community_, and such there are to now a considerable extent, even in the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; therefore, the formation of the civil society
must have been fraudulent or tyrannical upon any other supposition than
that it made provision, in some way or other, for destitute persons; that
is to say, for persons unable, from some cause or other, to provide for
themselves the food and raiment sufficient to preserve them from
perishing. Indeed, a provision for the destitute seems _essential to the
lawfulness_ of civil society; and this appears to have been the opinion of
BLACKSTONE, when, in the first Book and first Chapter of his Commentaries
on the Laws of England, he says, "the law not only regards _life_ and
_member_, and protects every man in the enjoyment of them, but also
_furnishes him with every thing necessary for their support_. For there is
no man so indigent or wretched, but he may _demand_ a supply _sufficient
for all the necessaries of life_ from the more opulent part of the
community, by means of the several statutes enacted for the relief of the
poor; a humane provision _dictated_ by the _principles of society_."

11. No man will contend, that the main body of the people in any country
upon earth, and of course in England, would have consented to abandon the
rights of nature; to give up their right to enjoy all things in common; no
man will believe, that the main body of the people would ever have given
their assent to the establishing of a state of things which should make
all the lands, and all the trees, and all the goods and cattle of every
sort, private property; which should have shut out a large part of the
people from having such property, and which should, at the same time, not
have provided the means of preventing those of them, who might fall into
indigence, from being _actually starved to death_! It is impossible to
believe this. Men never gave their assent to enter into society on terms
like these. One part of the condition upon which men entered into society
was, that care should be taken that no human being should perish from
want. When they agreed to enter into that state of things, which would
necessarily cause some men to be rich and some men to be poor; when they
gave up that right, which God had given them, to live as well as they
could, and to take the means wherever they found them, the condition
clearly was, the "_principle of society_;" clearly was, as BLACKSTONE
defines it, that the indigent and wretched should have a right to
"_demand_ from the rich a supply _sufficient_ for all the _necessities_ of
life."

12. If the society did not take care to act upon this principle; if it
neglected to secure the legal means, of preserving the life of the
indigent and wretched; then the society itself, in so far as that
wretched person was concerned, ceased to have a legal existence. It had,
as far as related to him, forfeited its character of legality. It had no
longer any claim to his submission to its laws. His rights of nature
returned: as far as related to him, the law of Nature revived in all its
force: that state of things in which all men enjoyed all things _in
common_ was revived with regard to him; and he took, and he had a right to
take, food and raiment, or, as Blackstone expresses it, "a supply
sufficient for all the necessities of life." For, if it be true, as laid
down by this English lawyer, that the _principles_ of society; if it be
true, that the very principles, or _foundations_ of society dictate, that
the destitute person shall have a legal demand for a supply from the rich,
sufficient for all the necessities of life; if this be true, and true it
certainly is, it follows of course that the principles, that is, the base,
or _foundation_, of society, is subverted, is gone; and that society is,
in fact, no longer what it was intended to be, when the indigent, when the
person in a state of extreme necessity, cannot, at once, obtain from the
rich such sufficient supply: in short, we need go no further than this
passage of BLACKSTONE, to show, that civil society is subverted, and that
there is, in fact, nothing legitimate in it, when the destitute and
wretched have no certain and legal resource.

13. But this is so important a matter, and there have been such monstrous
doctrines and projects put forth by MALTHUS, by the EDINBURGH REVIEWERS,
by LAWYER SCARLETT, by LAWYER NOLAN, by STURGES BOURNE, and by an
innumerable swarm of persons who have been giving before the House of
Commons what they call "_evidence_:" there have been such monstrous
doctrines and projects put forward by these and other persons; and there
seems to be such a lurking desire to carry the hostility to the working
classes still further, that I think it necessary in order to show, that
these English poor-laws, which have been so much calumniated by so many
greedy proprietors of land; I think it necessary to show, that these
poor-laws are the things which men of property, above all others, _ought
to wish to see maintained_, seeing that, according to the opinions of the
greatest and the wisest of men, they must suffer most in consequence of
the abolition of those laws; because, by the abolition of those laws, the
right given by the laws of nature would revive, and the destitute would
_take_, where they now simply _demand_ (as BLACKSTONE expresses it) in the
name of the law. There has been some difference of opinion, as to the
question, whether it be _theft_ or _no theft_; or, rather, whether it be a
_criminal act_, or _not a criminal act_, for a person, in a case of
extreme necessity from want of food, to take food without the assent and
even against the will, of the owner. We have, amongst our great lawyers,
SIR MATTHEW HALE and SIR WILLIAM BLACKSTONE, who contend (though as we
shall see, with much feebleness, hesitation, and reservation,) that it _is
theft_, notwithstanding the extremity of the want; but there are many, and
much higher authorities, foreign as well as English, on the other side.
Before, however, I proceed to the hearing of these authorities, let me
take a short view of _the origin of the poor laws in England_; for that
view will convince us, that, though the present law was passed but a
little more than two hundred years ago, there had been something to effect
the same purpose ever since England had been called England.

14. According to the Common Law of England, as recorded in the MIRROUR OF
JUSTICES, a book which was written before the Norman Conquest; a book in
as high reputation, as a law-book, as any one in England; according to
this book, CHAPTER 1st, SECTION 3d, which treats of the "First
constitutions made by the antient kings;" According to this work,
provision was made for the sustenance of the poor. The words are these:
"It was ordained, that the poor should be sustained by _parsons_, by
_rectors_ of the church, and by the _parishioners_, so that _none of them
die for want of sustenance_." Several hundred years later, the canons of
the church show, that when the church had become rich, it took upon itself
the whole of the care and expense attending the relieving of the poor.
These canons, in setting forth the manner in which the tithes should be
disposed of, say, "Let the priests set apart the first share for the
building and ornaments of the church; let them distribute the _second to
the poor and strangers, with their own hands, in mercy and humility_; and
let them reserve the third part for themselves." This passage is taken
from the canons of ELFRIC, canon 24th. At a later period, when the tithes
had, in some places, been appropriated to convents, acts of Parliament
were passed, compelling the impropriators to leave, in the hands of their
vicar, a sufficiency for the maintenance of the poor. There were two or
three acts of this sort passed, one particularly in the twelfth year of
RICHARD the Second, chapter 7th. So that here we have the most ancient
book on the Common Law; we have the canons of the church at a later
period; we have acts of Parliament at a time when the power and glory of
England were at their very highest point; we have all these to tell us,
that in England, from the very time that the country took the name, _there
was always a legal and secure provision for the poor, so that no person,
however aged, infirm, unfortunate, or destitute, should suffer from want_.

15. But, my friends, a time came when the provision made by the Common
Law, by the Canons of the Church, and by the Acts of the Parliament coming
in aid of those canons; a time arrived, when all these were rendered null
by what is called the PROTESTANT REFORMATION. This "Reformation," As it is
called, sweeped away the convents, gave a large part of the tithes to
greedy courtiers, put parsons with wives and children into the livings,
and left the poor without any resource whatsoever. This terrible event,
which deprived England of the last of her possessions on the continent of
Europe, reduced the people of England to the most horrible misery; from
the happiest and best fed and best clad people in the world, it made them
the most miserable, the most wretched and ragged of creatures. At last it
was seen that, in spite of the most horrible tyranny that ever was
exercised in the world, in spite of the racks and the gibbets and the
martial law of QUEEN ELIZABETH, those who had amassed to themselves the
property out of which the poor had been formerly fed, were compelled to
_pass a law to raise money, by way of tax, for relieving the necessities
of the poor_. They had passed many acts before the FORTY-THIRD year of the
reign of this Queen Elizabeth; but these acts were all found to be
ineffectual, till, at last, in the forty-third year of the reign: of this
tyrannical Queen, and in the year of our Lord 1601, that famous act was
passed, which has been in force until this day; and which, as I said
before, is still in force, notwithstanding all the various attempts of
folly and cruelty to get rid of it.

16. Thus, then, the present poor-laws are _no new thing_. They are no
_gift_ to the working people. You hear the greedy landowners everlastingly
complaining against this law of QUEEN ELIZABETH. They pretend that it was
_an unfortunate_ law. They affect to regard it as a great INNOVATION,
seeing that no such law existed before; but, as I have shown, a better law
existed before, having the same object in view. I have shown, that the
"Reformation," as it is called, had sweeped away that which had been
secured to the poor by the Common Law, by the Canons of the Church, and by
ancient Acts of Parliament. There was _nothing new_, then, in the way of
benevolence towards the people, in this celebrated Act of Parliament of
the reign of QUEEN ELIZABETH; and the landowners would act wisely by
holding their tongues upon the subject; or, if they be too noisy, one may
look into their GRANTS, and see if we cannot find something THERE to keep
out the present parochial assessments.

17. Having now seen _the origin_ of the present poor-laws, and the justice
of their due execution, let us return to those authorities of which I was
speaking but now, and an examination into which will show the extreme
danger of listening to those projectors who would abolish the poor-laws;
that is to say, who would sweep away that provision which was established
in the reign of QUEEN ELIZABETH, from a conviction that it was absolutely
necessary to preserve the peace of the country and the lives of the
people. I observed before that there has been some difference of opinion
amongst lawyers as to the question, whether it be, or be not, _theft_, to
take without his consent and against his will, the victuals of another, in
order to prevent the taker from starving. SIR MATTHEW HALE and SIR WILLIAM
BLACKSTONE say that it _is theft_. I am now going to quote the several
authorities on both sides, and it will be necessary for me to indicate the
works which I quote from by the words, letters, and figures which are
usually made use of in quoting from these works. Some part of what I shall
quote will be in Latin: but I shall put nothing in that language of which
I will not give you the translation. I beg you to read these quotations
with the greatest attention; for you will find, at the end of your
reading, that you have obtained great knowledge upon the subject, and
knowledge, too, which will not soon depart from your minds.

18. I begin with SIR MATTHEW HALE, (a Chief Justice of the Court of King's
Bench in the reign of Charles the Second,) who, in his PLEAS OF THE CROWN,
CHAP. IX., has the following passage, which I put in distinct paragraphs,
and mark A, B, and C.

19. A. "Some of the casuists, and particularly COVARRUVIUS, Tom. I. _De
furti et rapinæ restitutione_, § 3, 4, p. 473; and GROTIUS, _de jure
belli, ac pacis_; lib. II. cap. 2. § 6, tell us, that in case of extreme
necessity, either of hunger or clothing, the _civil distributions of
property cease_, and by a kind of tacit condition the _first community
doth return_, and upon this those common assertions are grounded:
'_Quicquid necessitas cogit, defendit._' [Whatever necessity calls for, it
justifies.] '_Necessitas est lex temporis et loci._' [Necessity is the law
of time and place.] '_In casu extremæ necessitatis omnia sunt communia._'
[In case of extreme necessity, all things are _in common_;] and,
therefore, in such case _theft is no theft_, or at least not punishable as
theft; and some even of our own lawyers have asserted the same; and very
bad use hath been made of this concession by some of the _Jesuitical_
casuists of _France_, who have thereupon advised apprentices and servants
to rob their masters, where they have been indeed themselves in want of
necessaries, of clothes or victuals; whereof, they tell them, they
themselves are the competent judges; and by this means let loose, as much
as they can, by their doctrine of probability, all the ligaments of
property and civil society."

20. B. "I do, therefore, _take it_, that, where persons live under the
same civil government, _as here in England_, that rule, at least by the
laws of _England_, is false; and, therefore, if a person being _under
necessity for want of victuals_, or clothes, shall, upon that account,
clandestinely, and '_animo furandi_,' [with intent to steal,] steal
another man's goods, it is felony, and a crime, by the laws of _England_,
punishable with death; although, the judge before whom the trial is, in
this case (as in other cases of extremity) be by the laws of _England_
intrusted with a power to reprieve the offender, before or after judgment,
in order to the obtaining the King's mercy. For, 1st, Men's properties
would be under a strange insecurity, being laid open to other men's
necessities, whereof no man can possibly judge, but the party himself.
And, 2nd, Because by the laws of this kingdom [here he refers to the 43
Eliz. cap. 2] sufficient provision is made for the supply of such
necessities by collections for the poor, and by the power of the civil
magistrate. Consonant hereunto seems to be the law even among the Jews; if
we may believe the wisest of kings. Proverbs vi. 30, 31. '_Men do not
despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry, but if
he be found, he shall restore seven-fold, he shall give all the substance
of his house._' It is true, _death_ among them was not the penalty of
theft, yet his necessity gave him _no exception_ from the ordinary
punishment inflicted by their law upon that offence."

21. C. "Indeed this rule, '_in casu extremæ necessitatis omnia sunt
communia_,' does hold, in some measure, in some particular cases, where,
by the tacit consent of nations, or of some particular countries or
societies, it hath obtained. First, among the _Jews_, it was lawful in
case of hunger to pull ears of standing corn, and eat, (Matt. xii. 1;) and
for one to pass through a vineyard, or olive-yard, to gather and eat
without carrying away. Deut. xxiii. 24, 25. SECOND, By the _Rhodian_ law,
and the common-maritime custom, if the common provision for the ship's
company fail, the master may, under certain temperaments, _break open the
private chests of the mariners or passengers_, and _make a distribution_
of that particular and private provision for the _preservation of the
ship's company_." Vide CONSOLATO DEL MARE, cap. 256. LE CUSTOMES DE LA
MERE, p. 77.

22. SIR WILLIAM BLACKSTONE agrees, in substance, with HALE; but he is, as
we shall presently see, much more eager to establish his doctrine; and, we
shall see besides, that he has not scrupled to be guilty of misquoting,
and of very shamefully _garbling_, _the Scripture_, in order to establish
his point. We shall find him flatly contradicting the laws of England;
but, he might have spared the Holy Scriptures, which, however, he has not
done.

23. To return to HALE, you see he is compelled to begin with acknowledging
that there are great authorities against him; and he could not say that
GROTIUS was not one of the most virtuous as well as one of the most
learned of mankind. HALE does not know very well what to do with those old
sayings about the justification which hard necessity gives: he does not
know what to do with the maxim, that, "in case of extreme necessity all
things _are owned in common_." He is exceedingly puzzled with these
ancient authorities, and flies off into prattle rather than argument, and
tells us a story about "_jesuitical_" casuists in France, who advised
apprentices and servants to rob their masters, and that they thus "let
loose the ligaments of property and civil society." I fancy that it would
require a pretty large portion of that sort of faith which induced this
Protestant judge to send witches and wizards to the gallows; a pretty
large portion of this sort of faith, to make us believe, that the
"_casuists_ of France," who, doubtless, _had servants of their own_, would
teach servants to rob their masters! In short, this prattle of the judge
seems to have been nothing more than one of those Protestant effusions
which were too much in fashion at the time when he wrote.

24. He begins his second paragraph, or paragraph B., by saying, that he
"_takes it_" to be so and so; and then comes another qualified expression;
he talks of civil government "_as here in England_." Then he says, that
the rule of GROTIUS and others, against which he has been contending, "he
takes _to be false_, at _least_," says he, "_by the laws of England_."
After he has made all these qualifications, he then proceeds to say that
_such taking is theft_; that it is _felony_; and it is a crime which the
laws of England punish with _death_! But, as if stricken with remorse at
putting the frightful words upon paper; as if feeling shame for the law
and for England itself, he instantly begins to tell us, that the judge who
presides at the trial is intrusted, "_by the laws of England_," with power
to _reprieve_ the offender, in order to the obtaining of the _King's
mercy_! Thus he softens it down. He will have it to be LAW to put a man to
death in such a case; but he is ashamed to leave his readers to believe,
that an English judge and an English king WOULD OBEY THIS LAW!

25. Let us now hear the reasons which he gives for this which he pretends
to be law. His first reason is, that there would be no security for
property, if it were laid open to the necessities of the indigent, of
which necessities _no man but the takers themselves could be the judge_.
He talks of a "strange insecurity;" but, upon my word, no insecurity could
be half so strange as this assertion of his own. BLACKSTONE has just the
same argument. "Nobody," says he, "would be a judge of the wants of the
taker, but the taker himself;" and BLACKSTONE, copying the very words of
HALE, talks of the "strange insecurity" arising from this cause. Now,
then, suppose a man to come into my house, and to take away a bit of
bacon. Suppose me to pursue him and seize him. He would tell me that he
was starving for want of food. I hope that the bare statement would induce
me, or any man in the world that I do call or ever have called my friend,
to let him go without further inquiry; but, if I chose to push the matter
further, there would be _the magistrate_. If he chose to commit the man,
would there not be a _jury_ and a _judge_ to receive evidence and to
ascertain _whether the extreme necessity existed or not_?

26. Aye, says Judge HALE; but I have another reason, a devilish deal
better than this, "and that is, the act of the 43d year of the reign of
QUEEN ELIZABETH!" Aye, my old boy, that is a thumping reason! "_Sufficient
provision_ is made for the supply of such necessities by _collections for
the poor_, and by the _power of the civil magistrate_." Aye, aye! that is
the reason; and, Mr. SIR MATTHEW HALE, there is _no other reason_, say
what you will about the matter. There stand the overseer and the civil
magistrate to take care that such necessities be provided for; and if they
did not stand there for that purpose, the law of nature would be revived
in behalf of the suffering creature.

27. HALE, not content however with this act of QUEEN ELIZABETH, and still
hankering after this hard doctrine, furbishes up a bit of Scripture, and
calls Solomon the _wisest of kings_ on account of these two verses which
he has taken. HALE observes, indeed, that the Jews did not put thieves to
_death_; but, to restore seven-fold was the _ordinary punishment_,
inflicted by their law, for theft; and here, says he, we see, that the
extreme necessity _gave no exemption_. This was a piece of such flagrant
sophistry on the part of HALE, that he could not find in his heart to send
it forth to the world without a qualifying observation; but even this
qualifying observation left the sophistry still so shameful, that his
editor, Mr. EMLYN, who published the work under authority of the House of
Commons, did not think it consistent with his reputation to suffer this
passage to go forth unaccompanied with the following remark: "But their
(the Jews') ordinary punishment being entirely _pecuniary_, could affect
him _only when he was found in a condition to answer it_; and therefore
the same reasons which could justify that, can, by no means, be extended
to a _corporal_, much less to a _capital_ punishment." Certainly: and this
is the fair interpretation of these two verses of the Proverbs.
PUFFENDORF, one of the greatest authorities that the world knows anything
of, observes, upon the argument built upon this text of Scripture, "It may
be objected, that, in Proverbs, chap. vi. verses 30, 31, he is called a
_thief_, and pronounced obnoxious to the penalty of theft, who steals to
satisfy his hunger; but whoever closely views and considers that text will
find that the thief there censured is neither in such _extreme necessity_
as we are now supposing, nor seems to have fallen into his needy condition
merely by ill fortune, without his own idleness or default: for the
context implies, that he had _a house and goods sufficient_ to make
seven-fold restitution; which he might have either sold or pawned; a
chapman or creditor being easily to be met with in times of plenty and
peace; for we have no grounds to think that the fact there mentioned is
supposed to be committed, either in time of war, or upon account of the
extraordinary price of provisions."

28. Besides this, I think it is clear that these two verses of the
Proverbs do not apply to _one and the same person_; for in the first verse
it is said, that men _do not despise_ a thief if he steal to satisfy his
soul when he is hungry. How, then, are we to reconcile this with
_morality_? Are we not to despise a _thief_? It is clear that the word
_thief_ does not apply to the first case; but to the second case only; and
that the distinction was here made for the express purpose of preventing
the man who took food to relieve his hunger _from being confounded with
the thief_. Upon any other interpretation, it makes the passage contain
nonsense and immorality; and, indeed, GROTIUS says that the latter text
does not apply to the person mentioned in the former. The latter text
could not mean a man taking food from necessity. It is _impossible_ that
it can mean that; because the man who was starving for want of food _could
not have_ seven-fold; _could not have_ any substance in his house. But
what are we to think of JUDGE BLACKSTONE, who, in his Book IV., chap. 2,
really _garbles_ these texts of Scripture. He clearly saw the effect of
the expression, "MEN DO NOT DESPISE;" he saw what an awkward figure these
words made, coming before the words "A THIEF;" he saw that, with these
words in the text, he could never succeed in making his readers believe
that a man ought to be _hanged_ for taking food to save his life. He
clearly saw that he could not make men believe that _God had said this_,
unless he could, somehow or other, get rid of those words about NOT
DESPISING the thief that took victuals when he was hungry. Being,
therefore, very much pestered and annoyed by these words about NOT
DESPISING, what does he do but fairly _leave them out_! And not only leave
them out, but leave out a part of both the verses, keeping in that part of
each that suited him, and no more; nay, further, leaving out one word, and
putting in another, giving a sense to the whole which he knew well never
was intended. He states the passage to be this: "If a thief steal to
satisfy his soul when he is hungry, _he_ shall restore seven-fold, _and_
shall give all the substance of his house." No broomstick that ever was
handled would have been too heavy or too rough for the shoulders of this
dirty-souled man. HALE, with all his desire to make out a case in favour
of severity, has given us the words fairly: but this shuffling fellow;
this smooth-spoken and mean wretch, who is himself _thief_ enough, God
knows, if stealing other men's thoughts and words constitute theft; this
intolerably mean reptile has, in the first place, left out the words
"_men do not despise_:" then he has left out the words at the beginning of
the next text, "_but if he be found_." Then in place of the "_he_," which
comes before the words "_shall give_" he puts the word "_and_;" and thus
he makes the whole apply to the poor creature that takes to satisfy his
soul when he is hungry! He leaves out every mitigating word of the
Scripture; and, in his reference, he represents the passage to be in _one_
verse! Perhaps, even in the history of the conduct of crown-lawyers, there
is not to be found mention of an act so coolly bloody-minded as this. It
has often been said of this BLACKSTONE, that he not only _lied_ himself,
but _made others lie_; he has here made, as far as he was able, a liar of
King Solomon himself: he has wilfully garbled the Holy Scripture; and
that, too, for the manifest purpose of justifying cruelty in courts and
judges; for the manifest purpose of justifying the most savage oppression
of the poor.

29. After all, HALE has not the courage to send forth this doctrine of
his, without allowing that the case of extreme necessity does, "in _some
measure_," and "in _particular cases_," and, "by the _tacit_ or _silent_
consent of nations," _hold good_! What a crowd of qualifications is here!
With what reluctance he confesses that which all the world knows to be
true, that the disciples of JESUS CHRIST pulled off, without leave, the
ears of standing corn, and ate them "_being an hungered_." And here are
two things to observe upon. In the first place this _corn_ was not what
_we call corn_ here in England, or else it would have been very droll sort
of stuff to crop off and eat. It was what the Americans call _Indian
corn_, what the French call _Turkish corn_; and what is called _corn_ (as
being far surpassing all other in excellence) in the Eastern countries
where the Scriptures were written. About four or five ears of this corn,
of which you strip all the husk off in a minute, are enough for a man's
breakfast or dinner; and by about the middle of August this corn is just
as wholesome and as efficient as bread. So that, this was _something_ to
take and eat without the owner's leave; it was something of value; and
observe, that the Pharisees, though so strongly disposed to find fault
with everything that was done by Jesus Christ and his disciples, did not
find fault of their _taking_ the corn to eat; did not call them _thieves_;
did not propose to punish them for _theft_; but found fault of them only
for having _plucked the corn on the Sabbath-day_! To pluck the corn was
_to do work_, and these severe critics found fault of this working on the
Sabbath-day. Then, out comes another fact, which HALE might have noticed
if he had chosen it; namely, that our Saviour reminds the Pharisees that
"DAVID and his companions, _being an hungered_, entered into the House of
God, and did eat the show-bread, to eat which was unlawful in any-body but
the priests." Thus, that which would have been _sacrilege_ under any other
circumstances; that which would have been one of the most _horrible of
crimes against the law of God_, became no crime at all when committed by a
person _pressed by hunger_.

30. Nor has JUDGE HALE fairly interpreted the two verses of DEUTERONOMY.
He represents the matter thus: that, if you be _passing through_ a
vineyard or an olive-yard you may gather and eat, without being deemed a
thief. This interpretation would make an Englishman believe that the
Scripture allowed of this taking and eating, only where there was a
_lawful foot-way_ through the vineyard. This is a very gross
misrepresentation of the matter; for if you look at the two texts, you
will find, that they say that, "when thou _comest into_;" that is to say,
when thou _enterest_ or _goest into_, "thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou
mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure, but thou shalt not put
any in thy vessel;" that is to say, that you should not go and make wine
in his vineyard and carry it away. Then in case of the corn, precisely the
same law is laid down. You may pluck with your _hand_; but not use the
_hook_ or a _sickle_. Nothing can be plainer than this: no distinction can
be wiser, nor more just. HALE saw the force of it; and therefore, as
these texts made very strongly against him, he does not give them at full
length, but gives us a misrepresenting abbreviation.

31. He had, however, too much regard for his reputation to conclude
without acknowledging the right of seizing on the provisions of others _at
sea_. He allows that private chests may be _broken open_ to prevent men
from dying with hunger at sea. He does not stop to tell us why men's lives
are _more precious_ on sea than on land. He does not attempt to reconcile
these liberties given by the Scripture, and by the maritime laws, with his
own hard doctrine. In short, he brings us to this at last: that he will
_not acknowledge_, that it is _not theft_ to take another man's goods,
without his consent, under any circumstances; but, while he will not
acknowledge this, he plainly leaves us to conclude, that no English judge
and no English king will _ever punish_ a poor creature that takes victuals
to save himself from perishing; and he plainly leaves us to conclude, that
it is the _poor-laws_ of England; that it is their existence and _their
due execution_, which deprive everybody in England of the right to take
food and raiment in case of extreme necessity.

32. Here I agree with him most cordially; and it is because I agree with
him in this, that I deprecate the abominable projects of those who would
annihilate the poor-laws, seeing 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
"Commentaries on the Laws of England." I will not treat this unprincipled
lawyer, this shocking court sycophant; I will not treat him as he has
treated King Solomon and the Holy Scriptures; I will not garble, misquote,
and belie him, as he garbled, misquoted, and belied them; I will give the
whole of the passage to which I allude, and which my readers may find in
the Fourth Book of his Commentaries. I request you to read it with great
attention; and to compare it, very carefully, with the passage that I have
quoted from SIR MATTHEW HALE, which you will find in paragraphs from 19 to
21 inclusive. The passage from BLACKSTONE is as follows:

35. "There is yet another case of necessity, which has occasioned great
speculation among the writers upon general law; viz., whether a man in
extreme want of food or clothing may justify stealing either, to relieve
his present necessities. And this both GROTIUS and PUFFENDORF, together
with _many other_ of the foreign jurists, hold in the affirmative;
maintaining by many ingenious, humane, and plausible reasons, that in such
cases the community of goods by a kind of tacit concession of society is
revived. And some even of our own lawyers have held the same; though it
seems to be an unwarranted doctrine, borrowed from the notions of some
civilians: at least it is now antiquated, the law of England admitting no
such excuse at present. And this its doctrine is agreeable not only to the
sentiments of many of the wisest ancients, particularly CICERO, who holds
that 'suum cuique incommodum ferendum est, potius quam de alterius
commodis detrahendum;' but also to the Jewish law, as certified by King
Solomon himself: 'If a thief steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry,
he shall restore seven-fold, and shall give all the substance of his
house:' which was the ordinary punishment for theft in that kingdom. And
this is founded upon the highest reason: for men's properties would be
under a strange insecurity, if liable to be invaded according to the
wants of others; of which wants no man can possibly be an adequate judge,
but the party himself who pleads them. In this country especially, there
would be a peculiar impropriety in admitting so dubious an excuse; for by
our laws such a sufficient provision is made for the poor by the power of
the civil magistrate, that it is impossible that the most needy stranger
should ever be reduced to the necessity of thieving to support nature.
This case of a stranger is, by the way, the strongest instance put by
Baron PUFFENDORF, and whereon he builds his principal arguments; which,
however they may hold upon the continent, where the parsimonious industry
of the natives orders every one to work or starve, yet must lose all their
weight and efficacy in England, where _charity is reduced to a system, and
interwoven in our very constitution_. Therefore, our laws ought by no
means to be taxed with being _unmerciful_, for denying this privilege to
the necessitous; especially when we consider, that the king, on the
representation of his ministers of justice, hath a power to soften the
law, and to extend mercy in cases of peculiar hardship. An advantage which
is wanting in many states, particularly those which are democratical: and
these have in its stead introduced and adopted, in the body of the law
itself, a multitude of circumstances tending to alleviate its rigour. But
the founders of our constitution thought it better to vest in the crown
the power of pardoning peculiar objects of compassion, than to countenance
and establish theft by one general undistinguishing law."

36. First of all, I beg you to observe, that this passage is merely _a
flagrant act of theft_, committed upon JUDGE HALE; next, you perceive,
that which I noticed in paragraph 28, a most base and impudent garbling of
the Scriptures. Next, you see, that BLACKSTONE, like HALE, comes, at last,
to the _poor-laws_; and tells us that to take other men's goods without
leave, is theft, _because_ "charity is here reduced to a system, and
interwoven in our very constitution." That is to say, to relieve the
necessitous; to prevent their suffering from want; completely to render
starvation impossible, makes a part of our very constitution. "THEREFORE,
our laws ought by no means to be taxed with being _unmerciful_ for denying
this privilege to the necessitous." Pray mark the word _therefore_. You
see, our laws, he says, are not to be taxed with being unmerciful in
deeming the necessitous taker _a thief_. And _why_ are they not to be
deemed unmerciful? BECAUSE the laws provide effectual relief for the
necessitous. It follows, then, of course, even according to BLACKSTONE
himself, that if the Constitution _had not_ provided this effectual relief
for the necessitous, then the laws _would have been unmerciful_ in deeming
the necessitous taker a thief.

37. But now let us hear what that GROTIUS and that PUFFENDORF say; let us
hear what these great writers on the law of nature and of nations say upon
this subject. BLACKSTONE has mentioned the names of them both; but he has
not thought proper to notice their arguments, much less has he attempted
to answer them. They are two of the most celebrated men that ever wrote;
and their writings are referred to as high authority, with regard to all
the subjects of which they have treated. The following is a passage from
GROTIUS, on War and Peace, Book II., chap. 2.

38. "Let us see, further, what common right there appertains to men in
those things which have already become the property of individuals. Some
persons, perchance, may consider it strange to question this, as
proprietorship seems to have absorbed all that right which arose out of a
state of things in common. But it is not so. For, it is to be considered,
_what was the intention of those who first introduced private property_,
which we may suppose to have been such, as to deviate as little as
possible from _natural equity_. For if even _written laws_ are to be
construed in that sense, as far as it is practicable, much more so are
_customs_, which are not fettered by the chains of writers.--Hence it
follows, first, that, in case of _extreme necessity_, the _pristine right
of using things revives_, as much as if they had remained in common;
because, in all human laws, as well as in the law of private property,
_this case of extreme necessity appears to have been excepted_.--So, if
the means of sustenance, as in case of a sea-voyage, should chance to
fail, that which any individual may have, should be shared in common. And
thus, a fire having broken out, I am justified in destroying the house of
my neighbour, in order to preserve my own house; and I may cut in two the
ropes or cords amongst which any ship is driven, if it cannot be otherwise
disentangled. All which exceptions are not made in the written law, but
are presumed.--For the opinion has been acknowledged amongst Divines,
that, if any one, in such case of necessity, take from another person what
is requisite for the preservation of his life, _he does not commit a
theft_. The meaning of which definition is not, as many contend, that the
proprietor of the thing be bound to give to the needy upon the principle
of _charity_; but, that all things distinctly vested in proprietors ought
to be regarded as such _with a certain benign acknowledgment of the
primitive right_. For if the original distributors of things were
questioned, as to what they thought about this matter, they would reply
what I have said. _Necessity_, says Father SENECA, _the great excuse for
human weakness, breaks every law_; that is to say, _human law_, or law
made after the manner of man."

39. "But cautions ought to be had, for fear this license should be abused:
of which the principal is, to try, in every way, whether the necessity can
be avoided by any other means; for instance, by making application to the
magistrate, or even by trying whether the use of the thing can, by
entreaties, be obtained from the proprietor. PLATO permits water to be
fetched from the well of a neighbour upon this condition alone, that the
person asking for such permission shall dig in his own well in search of
water as far as the chalk: and SOLON, that he shall dig in his own well
as far as forty cubits. Upon which PLUTARCH adds, _that he judged that
necessity was to be relieved, not laziness to be encouraged_."

40. Such is the doctrine of this celebrated civilian. Let us now hear
PUFFENDORF; and you will please to bear in mind, that both these writers
are of the greatest authority upon all subjects connected with the laws of
nature and of nations. We read in their works the result of an age of
study: they have been two of the great guides of mankind ever since they
wrote: and, we are not to throw them aside, in order to listen exclusively
to Parson HAY, to HULTON OF HULTON, or to NICHOLAS GRIMSHAW. They tell us
what they, and what other wise men, deemed to be right; and, as we shall
by and by see, the laws of England, so justly boasted of by our ancestors,
hold precisely the same language with these celebrated men. After the
following passage from PUFFENDORF, I shall show you what our own lawyers
say upon the subject; but I request you to read the following passage with
the greatest attention.

41. "Let us inquire, in the next place, whether the necessity of
preserving our life can give us any right over other men's goods, so as to
make it allowable for us to seize on them for our relief, either secretly,
or by open force, against the owner's consent. For the more clear and
solid determination of which point, we think it necessary to hint in short
on the causes upon which distinct _properties_ were first introduced in
the world; designing to examine them more at large in their proper place.
Now the main reasons on which _properties_ are founded, we take to be
these two; that the feuds and quarrels might be appeased which arose in
the _primitive communion_ of things, and that men might be put under a
kind of necessity of being industrious, every one being to get his
maintenance by his own application and labour. This division, therefore,
of goods, was not made, that every person should sit idly brooding over
the share of wealth he had got, without assisting or serving his fellows;
but that any one might dispose of his things how he pleased; and if he
thought fit to communicate them to others, he might, at least, be thus
furnished with an opportunity of laying obligations on the rest of
mankind. Hence, when properties were once established, men obtained a
power, not only of exercising commerce to their mutual advantage and gain,
but likewise of dispensing more largely in the works of humanity and
beneficence; whence their diligence had procured them a greater share of
goods than others: whereas before, when all things lay in common, men
could lend one another no assistance but what was supplied by their
corporeal ability, and could be charitable of nothing but of their
_strength_. Further, such is the force of _property_, that the
_proprietor_ hath a right of delivering his goods with his own hands; even
such as he is obliged to give to others. Whence it follows, that when one
man has anything owing from another, he is not presently to seize on it at
a venture, but ought to apply himself to the owner, desiring to receive it
from his disposal. Yet in case the other party refuse thus to make good
his obligation, the power and privilege of _property_ doth not reach so
far as that the things may not be taken away without the owner's consent,
either by the authority of the magistrate in _civil communities_, or in a
_state of nature_, by violence and hostile force. And though in regard to
bare Natural Right, for a man to relieve another in extremity with his
goods, for which he himself hath not so much occasion, be a duty obliging
only _imperfectly_, and not in the manner of a _debt_, since it arises
wholly from the virtue of _humanity_; yet there seems to be no reason why,
by the additional force of a civil ordinance, it may not be turned into a
strict and perfect obligation. And this _Seldon_ observes to have been
done among the _Jews_; who, upon a man's refusing to give such alms as
were proper for him, _could force him to it by an action at law_. It is no
wonder, therefore, that they should forbid _their poor_, on any account,
to seize on the goods of others, enjoining them to take only what private
persons, or the public officers, or stewards of alms, should give them on
their petition. Whence the stealing of what was another's, though upon
extreme necessity, passed in that state for theft or rapine. But now
supposing _under another government the like good provision is not made
for persons in want_, supposing likewise that the covetous temper of men
of substance cannot be prevailed on to give relief, and that the needy
creature is not able, either by his work or service, or by making sale of
anything that he possesses, to assist his present necessity, _must_ he,
_therefore, perish with famine_? Or _can any human institution bind me_