Chapter XI: Concluding Chapter

"And when I shall go to my account, and the great
Questioner whose judgments err not, shall say to me, 'What
didst thou with the lent talent?' I can truly answer,
'Lord, it is here; and with it all that I could add to
it--doing my best to make little much.'"--EBENEZER ELLIOTT.

The above words of the brave Corn Law Rhymer refer of course to far higher duties than any with which we have dealt in this volume. That application may be made of them even to our present subject is nevertheless clear, and we leave the thoughtful reader to make it. Real economy and frugality are virtues, and as such are inculcated in the Christian code; neglect of them is condemned both by the moral and the religious code. Christ expressed the very spirit of economy, care of little things, a prudent thrift, and avoidance of all waste, when after miraculously feeding the multitude in the desert He instructed His disciples to "gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost:" and it is at least noteworthy, that this injunction immediately followed another, wherein He warned the same men against the greed of life, telling them that a man's riches did not consist in the abundance of his possessions.

This may be perhaps a very fitting opportunity to say that a great deal depends upon the motive and the object for which such virtues are cultivated; that it is very possible to attach far too great an importance to mere habits of saving: the motive for saving may at times be vicious, and the purpose for which and the manner how the hoards once scraped together may be applied, more vicious still. This is so palpable that we need not dwell upon the subject. Not less so is the wise medium course to be followed. The difference between those who cultivate and those who neglect frugal and economical habits may be expressed simply in the former having bread enough and to spare, and the latter having bread for to-day--and not always that--but none for to-morrow. It is by the capacity of looking forward in the present moment to the possibilities of to-morrow that the civilized man is distinguished from the savage; it is by the readiness with which provision is made for possible emergencies that the wise man is distinguished from the fool. Real economy, aided by prudence, is a virtue. Cicero says that "the best source of wealth is economy;" but it is also the best source of comfort, self-respect, and independence. Prudence thinks of an adverse season amidst the prosperity of a good one; and Economy arranges for the bad time. Prudence thinks of two very possible and one certain contingency in the life of every human being; and Economy weighs the chances well and provides for the worst--it provides for the incidence of failing health, and for the chances of losing, through one of the many eventualities of life, worldly position, or the means of breadwinning; and it also does something to provide for that time when the anxieties, the joys, and the sorrows of life shall be hushed in death.

It is well, therefore, and it is almost indispensable, that these habits should be cultivated; it is well also, and quite indispensable, that means and provisions should be used to this end. The first stone which the learned Wotton refers to in the motto on the first page of this volume, is without doubt the first act in the habit of economy; and we have been endeavouring throughout the course of this history to point out with some approach to accuracy the exact spot where a person may lay this indispensable "first stone," where he may probably best lay the second or third, and how possibly he may commence with the superstructure.

Savings Banks and the other provident measures of which we have spoken are principally to be regarded as preliminary means, the first or stepping-stones to higher things. When a man has become, for example, a depositor in any of the numerous kinds of Savings Banks, he has only taken, as it were, the first step on the road to competence; but one step leads to another.[206] A very slight knowledge of human nature will show that when once a man gets his foot upon the round of the social ladder, and keeps it there till he is secure of his footing, he is soon ambitious of taking the next step. So true is this regarded, that in common parlance many kinds of journeymen are said to have made their fortune when they have saved their first pound. When George Stephenson's wages were raised to twelve shillings a week, he declared "he was now a made man for life;" when he had saved his first guinea, he proudly said to one of his mates, that he "was now a rich man." And in one sense he was right; he had taken the first step; and further, "The man who," says Mr. Smiles, "after satisfying his wants, has something to spare, is no longer poor."

We have said that Savings Banks are preliminary means. We think, however, that they are the _safest_ initiatory steps that could be taken by those of the labouring classes who wish to rise from small beginnings to those higher things spoken of.[207] Thousands of people of small means are content with them; with the Savings Bank they begin, continue, and end, and many of them have had reason to congratulate themselves upon having taken such a course: they have been saved endless trouble and disaster, have in the great majority of instances felt that their earnings were safe, that the profits were not going up and down like those of their neighbours, but were always steady, always to be relied upon, and always calculable to a penny. That these returns are really not so insignificant as many suppose, and that if small earnings are allowed to accumulate at compound interest they must make a decent provision against the winter of life, the following case will demonstrate.[208] The late Mr. Thomas Allen of Gledholt, Huddersfield, on the 28th of March, 1818, gave to each of his seven servants a sovereign to become depositors on the opening of the Huddersfield Savings Bank. On that day Esther Sykes became a depositor to the extent of 1_l._

She continued to deposit the Savings from her wages £ s. d.
from that time to the 21st of July, 1828, amounting to 119 11 0
Interest accruing from 1818 to 1828 30 9 0
---------
150 0 0
=========
This sum of £150 being allowed to accumulate by interest
until 1836 became 200 0 0
---------
From 1836 interest on this sum had to be withdrawn
half-yearly, which from 1836 to 1863 amounted to 160 9 8
---------
Esther Sykes died March, 1863, aged 78, and her
executors received from the Bank the sum of 200 0 0
=========

Thus in this interesting case the cash deposited at different times amounted to 119_l._ and the total amount of interest on that sum was 240_l._, of which 160_l._ was paid to the depositor herself during her lifetime, and 200_l._ to her executors. It is not a little curious, nor is it surprising, that five of the relatives and legatees of this Esther Sykes should have gone to the Huddersfield Savings Bank to deposit the money left to them.

Of the other promising provident measures adapted to the requirements of the industrious classes, the most important, but at the same time a somewhat hazardous one, is that of co-operative societies. These societies, though beset with difficulties, are doing a good work in many localities. The stronghold of the system, be it remembered, is in a town where, owing to the cupidity of the manager of the Savings Bank, the savings of years were swallowed up, and, in consequence, habits of accumulation in this form were rooted out from among the people. The co-operative principle can be directly traced to the wide-spread distrust created by this gigantic and far-reaching fraud. It remains now to be seen whether a higher intelligence and a greater power of self-government than is generally found in large associations of working men will not be indispensable to the progress of these societies. Personally, we have little hesitation in affirming that the real progress of these classes will be safer, and not only safer but quicker, if the bulk of them will leave combined enterprises of this nature to those of their fellows who have already saved money enough to enable them not only to enter into such business, but to lose in the venture. Once a man has run up an account in any of the people's banks--whether the old or the new banks does not make much difference--he might, and perhaps ought to risk a proportion in such societies, which, where properly and prudently managed, are very beneficial to all connected with them.[209]

The same remarks apply to Building Societies to a great extent; though here perhaps there is little of the risk which besets all kinds of large and small joint-stock companies. Unfortunately, however, the working-class element, which was prominent at the origination of building clubs, is being rapidly eliminated from them in most localities, and almost everywhere the tradesman class predominates.[210] The working classes, if they have not been saving their earnings for years, cannot command and pay, with that regularity necessary in such enterprises, the instalments due; and hence they either do not venture to join at all (except where the club is on a very small scale), or if they do, they ultimately withdraw from them.[211]

Fifty other different objects might be mentioned for which the working classes require the means of accumulating the trifles they can save with the object of employing some of the money on higher kinds of investments when it has amounted to a good round sum; the purchase of a cottage, of an annuity, of a life insurance policy, are only a few of them. In this way the Savings Bank not only assists the industrious classes by offering machinery expressly fitted for their present advantage, but does an equally beneficial work in leading them on safely to higher and more important investments.

Let it be granted that Savings Banks fulfil all, or most, of the conditions which we have assigned them and ask for them, what then remains to be done to make their advantages better known, and to bring them still more within the reach of those classes for which they are specially designed, and to which they are specially applicable? It may indeed be questioned whether, having provided the facilities, society should not now leave the matter where it is, to the operation of advancing intelligence, to the growth of economical knowledge, and to the increase in the experience of the poorer classes. Working men are tired, and to our own knowledge have long been, of hearing of societies and organizations for their elevation;[212] they know perfectly well that their "elevation"--for which no doubt too few of them care--must begin, continue, and end in themselves. The better class of workmen laugh at many schemes designed for their benefit; and although there may be odd instances of men who seem not to be above being turned into an "object," it is simply repellant to the great bulk of them.[213]

A working man, though he may not like to be "raised," may like to be advised how he can best help himself: and such advice is quite necessary and legitimate under certain conditions and in certain circumstances. It altogether depends, it appears to us, upon the person who does it and the manner in which it is done. First and foremost it seems to be not only necessary but right that masters of workmen should endeavour to influence those under them; that they should--

"Relinquishing their several 'vantage posts
Of wealthy ease and honourable toil"--

do something to direct aright those energies from which they have benefited, and which if rightly developed may also in time lead their possessors to comfort, to reputation, even to wealth. A master's duty to his workmen, as we remember to have seen it expressed somewhere, scarcely ends when he pays them their wages. The men may be thoroughly independent, and after accomplishing their stipulated work may be, and feel that they are, their own masters: but there are nevertheless divers opportunities for masters, without claiming or assuming superiority, to benefit those employed under them. The master is pretty generally under the pressing responsibility of superior knowledge and greater experience; and he who sees how the worldly position of his men can be _safely_ improved, and does not at least attempt to suggest or help to this improvement, can scarcely be said to fulfil the duties of his position. An employer may, indeed, be too conscious of his dignity, and, standing on the lofty pedestal reared for him or which he has reared for himself, throw down with a lavish hand bounties upon his men; and they will not be accepted, and perhaps ought not to be: but let him show a personal interest in them, prudently advise them, "show a wisdom that shall bridge the gulf" that separates the two, and he will not only do much to destroy the feeling, which has become almost instinctive among workmen, that the master is somehow selfishly acting for his own ultimate benefit, but he will awaken a confidence, become the object of the men's esteem, and wield an enormous influence over them.

Let so much as this be granted, or even let part of it be granted, employers of labour may not only turn their thoughts to such schemes for savings as we have been engaged upon, but they may easily arrange, in conjunction with the proper authorities, branch schemes such as described in the last two chapters, to be suited to the varying circumstances of the case. If they are convinced of the benefits of the one, let them advise; if they wish to give reasonable help, let them act.

Without reference, however, to the Government schemes just referred to, the State sets an admirable example to all large employers in the provident arrangements which have been made for public officers; and we think there must be much in the provisions in question which might be turned to good account in, and be made applicable to, large private concerns. Few Government _employés_ should ever come to beggary; if they have not been prematurely cast aside, either by wilful misconduct or gross carelessness on their own part, they cannot come to the parish: further, great numbers of them are assisted to make provision for their families at their death. Nearly all Government servants may be said to have bargained with their masters at the time they entered the service, not only for a fair day's wage for a fair day's work, but for nearly all the provisions of a Friendly Society during sickness; for a Deferred Annuity when they are past work, or after a certain age; and in some instances--it ought to be in all--for assistance towards insuring their lives for the benefit of their family. It were idle to say that none of these considerations enter into the original contract, and have had no influence on the scale of remuneration paid for actual work; it were far more to the point to say that departments of Government compel their servants to be provident and to prepare; for sickness, old age, and death, and make it involuntary in the case of sickness and old age, by taking the necessary payments upon themselves.

Of the scheme of Life Insurance at present in force in the Post Office, for example, we spoke in the previous chapter. With regard to sickness, a certain time is allowed for full pay; another definite period for half-pay. In respect to Superannuation Allowances, which we have termed the Deferred Annuities, it is true that at one time civil servants were required to pay towards it out of their salaries; but this has been discontinued by Act of Parliament, and the present arrangement may simply be considered as a small rise in the rate of wages--the deduction being compulsory on all classes alike.

Why should not a similar plan, or at any rate the principle of it, be urged upon private employers? Spite of some of the difficulties which would at once present themselves, we believe that there is little impracticable about it, and little that might not be surmounted. Even if it should be found impossible to apply such arrangements to many concerns, there is still the admirable machinery designed in connexion with the Annuities Act of 1864; and we again commend the plan to the attention and candour of large employers.

We think that to a very large extent the influence which masters must exercise over their workmen, or which they could not fail to exercise if they were to show a proper degree of interest in their subordinates, has never yet been exercised. If reason, persuasion, entreaty of a certain kind, alike fail--as they may often have done--to induce saving habits and due provident provision for themselves and families, we confess a difficult problem presents itself. This difficulty has been felt for years. Forty years ago the _Quarterly Review_, in an able article, said that Savings Banks ought to have formed a sinking fund before that time for the abolition of poor rates: "If the present state of things continues," says the writer, "it should become a question whether the master ought not to deposit in the Savings Bank at least a shilling in the pound of all wages paid by him, to be placed to the account of the individuals whom he employs." Several times since this was written, the _Quarterly Review_ has returned to the charge. For many years our system of Poor Laws has rigidly assessed property for the relief of poverty, and secured the necessaries of life for all the destitute, no matter how largely they themselves may have been answerable for their destitute condition. With some beneficial changes the law stands the same, and is scrupulously enforced.

It is very clear that many men's wages are so high in good times, that, if they worked steadily and lived with moderation, they might easily reserve out of them a fund of supply against times of want, which would carry them through till their trade revived. The immense power in the hands of the working classes to promote their own self-dependence is illustrated by the enormous sums spent by these classes alone in mere indulgence; and it is shown again, in the immense funds raised amongst them to support combinations and strikes. That thousands will not use the means they have is proved by their excesses, their prodigality, the recklessness of their expenditure, the division of the days of the week into days of work and days of gross and obstinate idleness; and in much of this--regarding the result which follows to themselves, their wives and families, if they have the misfortune to have them--there is perhaps more real delinquency than in many of the crimes for which penal statutes have been framed.

The question is at any rate admissible, whether the same power which can order a compulsory payment of rates to support the poor, might not, and ought not, to restrict the means by which men are made and kept in poverty; or whether the same laws which make the frugal support the improvident should not also compel the improvident to do something to support themselves. This _principle_ is indeed recognised by Government, as we have already shown, in the arrangements made for its own servants; it is therefore not a question so much of principle as of _degree_, and whether the Government should insist on a measure of coercive contribution applying to others beyond their control. "I have often thought," said the late Mr. J. Silk Buckingham, in a letter now before us, "it would be perfectly wise and just to pass a law compelling all employers of labour of every class, age, and sex, to deduct five per cent. from the wages or salaries of all in their employ, to be invested in the Government funds for a Deferred Annuity after sixty years of age, giving power to the labourers themselves to make further additions as they saw fit on the voluntary principle. If it should be said that no Government has a right to make people provide for themselves by force of law, I am sure they have as great a right to do this as to make the honest, sober, and industrious part of the people pay in poor rates and taxes for maintaining paupers and criminals, who have become so chiefly through want of prudential conduct in youth."[214]

Finally, it is upon those who will not, and cannot by any available means, be brought to apply the remedy of provident investments during the heyday of life for themselves, that we think some such arrangement as that upon which the Government insists on employing civil servants, should be brought to bear, and that, only as a _dernier ressort_, our Legislature should consider whether it were not possible, and within its province, to apply a more complete and direct remedy by force of law. Formidable obstacles, we repeat, may be imagined, and actually would be experienced, in either case; but they could easily be smoothed by the fifty years' experience which the country has had of Savings Bank management and the conduct of provident schemes generally, and they may very possibly be entirely removed by the far-reaching, simple, ancillary measures of the last four years.

[206] "To save money," says Mr. Greg, "and to have invested it
securely, is to have become a capitalist. To have become a
capitalist is for the poor man to have overleaped a great gulf; to
have opened a path for himself into a new world; to have started
on a career which may lead him, as it has led so many originally
not more favoured by fortune than himself, to comfort, to
reputation, to wealth, to power."

[207] "I have studied the matter to the core, and it has resulted
in a firm conviction, that were all the many valuable schemes
which have been devised for ameliorating the condition of the
masses conjoined, for safely, surely, and reasonably meeting the
exigencies of every-day life, the Savings Bank single-handed would
outvie them all."--Mr. James Frame's _Tracts on Savings Banks_.

[208] We are indebted to Mr. Sikes of Huddersfield for the
particulars of this case.

[209] Mr. W. B. Chorley, author of a _Handbook of Social
Intercourse_, &c. &c. was asked his opinion on co-operative
societies, that opinion to be inserted in the _Co-operator_, the
Society's organ. Mr. Chorley gives it very candidly, the Editor
with equal candour giving it insertion. "The working man's
earnings should be absolutely safe. Post Office Savings Banks are
the only means of deposit which I am warranted in unconditionally
recommending under all circumstances. I am far from saying that in
peculiar cases and districts the workman may not act judiciously
in joining co-operative stores; but it cannot be extended beyond a
certain point with success, and I fear that any attempts to push
or rapidly extend the plan over a large area will prove a mistake
ending in failure and loss." ... Mr. Smiles in his _Workmen's
Earnings, Strikes, and Savings_, a reprint of articles from the
_Quarterly Review_, and Mr. Greg in his _Provident Investments_, a
reprint of an article in the _Edinburgh Review_, express similar
views on the co-operative principle as applied exclusively to the
working classes as those we have quoted from Mr. Chorley.

[210] The first Benefit Building Society which can be traced was
founded in 1815 under the auspices of the Earl of Selkirk. It was
a village club composed of some working men in Kirkcudbright, in
Scotland. Other institutions of a similar kind followed, and were
called "Menages," and soon afterwards the principle was introduced
into England. In 1836 the first Act was passed with regard to
them.

[211] "A Building Society of which I am a trustee started some
five years ago with a considerable majority of working men; but in
the course of its operations (on looking over the list to-day) I
find there are very few who can be strictly called working men
left. The punctuality of the payments, the fines, and those
arrangements which are essential to the proper working of a
society, acting upon men who are occasionally thrown out of
employment, and without means altogether, have compelled them to
withdraw themselves."--_Evidence of Mr. W. Cooper. Committee on
Provident Investments._ 1850.

[212] A large volume might be compiled which should simply give a
bare indication of the aims of such schemes and societies,
including one set forth in a MS. volume which we have seen in the
British Museum, entitled, _Greevous Grones for the Poore, done by
a Wellwisher_, down to the latest benevolent scheme, and its list
of patrons beginning with an Archbishop and ending with the
Squire.

[213] Savings Banks are not free from an amount of patronizing,
which is only very rarely appreciated by the workman, though it
may delight the very small shopkeeper class. Mr. Boodle, in his
examination before a Savings Bank Committee, in 1849, thought fit
to relate a very ludicrous instance of this, which, though told to
show the amount of confidence reposed in the names of some
trustees, really proves something very different. "At one time,"
says Mr. Boodle, "the late Lord Spencer was attending as manager,
and a depositor put in a sum of money; he looked at his book when
it was returned to him, and finding the name of 'Spencer,' asked
the actuary who it was. The actuary replied 'Lord Spencer.' The
man said, 'You do not mean that this is Lord Spencer?' When
reassured, he said, 'Then I will give another sovereign,' and
actually did put in another sovereign." This must have been a
red-letter day in this person's history, though it reasonably
admits of doubt whether the incident would be matter of personal
gratification to Lord Spencer, the wise and excellent Lord Althorp
of the Lower House.

[214] "For the last twelve years," says a living practical
philanthropist, "I have been considerably engaged in the
administration of Poor Law Relief. I could not disguise from my
reluctant notice the painful fact of how large and overwhelming a
percentage of applicants for relief had been, for long periods of
their life, in the habit of earning wages, the surplus of which
remaining over and above the cost of their maintenance, would, if
properly invested, have secured them an honourable independent
subsistence for the unproductive residue of their lives. Their
frugal contemporaries, whom they scandalized by their example (and
it might have been said, derided for what they considered their
meanness), they further tax with the burden of their subsistence.
They commit a constructive injustice upon their more provident
fellow-citizens; and when society inveighs against the gratuitous
pauper, not because he is poor, but because he has viciously made
himself so, society is not unjust in such a retaliation upon its
trespassers. The gracious law of England, which makes the Poor Law
compulsory, would deal with scarcely more than even-handed justice
were it to compel some kind of club payment too. And if it were an
infringement of the liberty of the subject to compel my neighbour
to support a club, it is an infringement of my liberty to compel
me to support my neighbour."--MELIORA, _edited by Viscount
Ingestre_, vol. ii.