of its constitution, exclude hazardous lives, except, at least, at extra premiums. The rank of life, probably, of parties effecting insurances may also benefit the office; but if married men are to a certain extent to be considered as selected lives, this also, I should think, must tell in favour of the office, as I presume that, from family reasons, more married men effect insurances than unmarried men.

In general, of course, it is impossible to derive any good result from statistical facts or apparent coincidences except by comparison. A high official person connected with Scotland was summoned before a Committee of the House of Lords to give evidence in connexion with the new Divorce court proposed for England, and was asked whether, in his opinion, the facility of divorce existing in Scotland was unfavourable to the morality of married persons there. The judicious answer was, "I have not sufficient experience of the comparative morality of married persons in different countries to be able to give an opinion on that question."

Matters not yet Reduced to Statistics.

The subjects to which statistics may be extended seem to be innumerable, and new ones are cropping up every day. In the pages of 'Nature' there lately appeared a letter of a somewhat curious kind, which may perhaps engage the attention of our fellow-associate member Mr. Tyler. The suggestion in that letter was that the degree of civilization existing in any country is connected with the quantity of Soap there consumed. The writer gave as a formula the equation of

S x=

being the amount of civilization inquired for, S being the soap consumed, and P the population consuming it; so that the amount of civilization depended on the proportion of S, the numerator, to P, the denominator. If S is large in proportion to P, then the civilization is great, and vice versa. How the civilization of Scotland in the olden time would come out according to this test I shall not inquire; but if there is any truth in the proposition, it gives additional relevancy and interest to the question which is sometimes vulgarly put by some people to their friends as to how they are provided with that commodity. I have not yet seen any tables framed upon this principle, but I have no doubt that the Registrar-General will keep it in view.

An inquiry of a more serious nature, and indeed peculiarly important and impressive, is connected with one of the most remarkable phenomena in human natureI mean the occasional appearance in the world of men of great genius. From time to time men have arisen whose mental powers have far transcended the ordinary standard of human intellect, and who have thereby been enabled within the space of a single life, and by the effort of a single mind, to give an impulse to science and discovery which they could not have received through long generations of average mediocrity. Whether this singular boon and blessing to mankind can be traced to any law is a natural but mysterious inquiry. Some persons have considered the production of exceptional genius as quite an insulated fact; and Savage Landor declared that no great man had ever a great son, unless Philip and Alexander of Macedon constituted an exception. Mr. Galton, however, in his interesting work on 'Hereditary Genius,' has endeavoured to prove that genius runs in families, or, at least, that men of genius have generally sprung from a stock where great mental power is conspicuous; and he adheres to the view commonly taken as to the importance of the maternal character and influence in the formation of genius. I do not venture to give any opinion upon Mr. Galton's theory, but his book contains an important collection of facts bearing on the subject, and a great deal of curious collateral speculation. Mr. Galton attributes great power in many ways to the principle of heredity, as it seems now to be called. He does not, indeed, go so far as the Irish statist, who, as mentioned by Sidney Smith, announced it as a fact that sterility was often hereditary; but he states that comparative infertility is transmitted in families; and adduces as a remarkable example, a fact not generally known, if it be a fact, that in the case, that frequently happens, of Peers marrying heiresses, the family is apt to die out very soon, the heiress being naturally, in the general case, an only child, and bequeathing to her descendants a tendency to pro

แ

duce small families, which do not afford the usual chance of a numerous supply of descendants. Whatever may be said of some of his other opinions, I hesitate to concur with Mr. Galton in his proposition, that as it is easy to obtain by careful selection a breed of dogs or horses, gifted with peculiar powers of running or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations." I doubt greatly the practicability of such a plan; and suspect there are some elements in human nature that would counteract it. Persons of proud family descent have often a horror of mesalliances; but I scarcely think it would be possible to inspire people of genius with the same esprit de corps or desire to wed with those on a par with their own eminence. Men of genius do not seem to me apt to fall in love with women as clever as themselves, and I rather suspect the tendency is to look for some difference of character, an instinct of which it is the object, or at least the result, to keep up the average of talent rather than to multiply the highest forms of mental power. At any rate we may here ask poor Polly's. question: "Can love be controlled by advice?" and however we may in other respects agree with Horace's maxim, Fortes creantur fortibus et bonis," I question whether a high mental stature could be maintained by coupling male and female genius together, or whether the experiment might not fail as signally as it is said sometimes to have done with Frederic William's attempts to breed grenadiers. I strenuously advise, however, that a marriage with a fool of either sex should be, always considered as a mesalliance, and I would particularly warn the ladies against such a step, taken sometimes, it is said, in the hope that their sway may in that way be more easily maintained. A fool is as difficult to be governed as a mule, and the couplet, I believe, is strictly true, that says—

"Wise men alone, who long for quiet lives,

Wise men alone are governed by their wives."

Economic Laws.

Leaving the multifarious field of Statistics, and reverting to our leading subject of Economic science, or which may seem a synonymous term, Political economy, it embraces specially the study of those natural laws which have reference to the Wealth of nations. This is perhaps its proper character as a science; but when those laws are ascertained in their natural operation, practical questions arise of great difficulty for the determination of any Government desirous of promoting, not merely the wealth, but the welfare of a nation. How far in particular are those laws to be left to their natural and spontaneous operation? or, how far are they to be modified either by limiting or by supplementing their operation? For example, freedom of trade and freedom of contract are, as a general rule, the best means of promoting activity and prosperity in the departments with they are concerned. But it can scarcely be maintained that this ideal freedom is never to be infringed. I do not merely refer here to the protection which may be afforded to persons under age in reference to their treatment, or to the manner in which they may be employed. In the eye of the law as well as of reason, a contract as to the employment or services of a person in nonage is in reality no contract at all. An infant or minor cannot contract, and any contract that may be made in his name by any guardian, or even by a parent, in every country where law is established, must be subject to revision. A cruel or injurious contract as to a child's labour must be capable of correction and repression, just as any bodily outrage inflicted upon a man would infer punishment and restraint. Even with persons of mature years the general and better opinion seems to be that certain classes of the community require to be protected by restrictions on the freedom of commerce or contract. Long ago this system extensively prevailed, and very high and comprehensive ideas existed as to the paternal duties thus incumbent on Government. Let us take two instances of this kind, which may be placed, to some extent at least, in contrast with each other.

The history of the Usury laws is well known. Originating in a primitive idea that interest upon money was unnatural, those laws kept up prohibitions against the amount of interest that could be stipulated, with a professed view to the protection of needy borrowers against extortionate lenders. It was not till the year

1787 that there issued from the wilds of Russia a voice in defence of Usury, which proved to all thinking men the falsehood and folly of the existing system; but it was still many years before the wise views of Bentham on this subject were carried into practical effect.

The Truck System.

Take, on the other hand, the case of what is called the Truck System. There is nothing in abstract reason to prevent master and servant, employer and workman, from agreeing, if they please, that the remuneration shall consist partly in the supply of food or furnishings. Many contracts for work or service proceed expressly upon that footing, and could scarcely be arranged on any other. But the fraud or unfair proceedings to which the truck system so often leads, the oppressions and exactions often involved in it, the overwhelming power of the masters or their managers in working it, and the helpless condition to which it reduces workmen and their families, are such that public opinion seems so powerfully directed against it, that the laws for repressing it are more likely to be tightened than relaxed. Whether the workmen will ever be so free and independent as to dispense with protection, or whether a healthy and high feeling of self-respect and honour will prevail among masters, so as to place under ban those of their number who use or abuse this system, are matters of which I am incompetent to judge; but I fear that for a long time some restrictions will be maintained. The existing condition of things is most unsatisfactory; for the Act seems to be constantly evaded, and all evasions of statutory regulations are morally, as well as economically, mischievous. The best remedy is, if possible, to diminish the improvidence of workmen; for, in most cases, if the workman has enough in hand to live without advances before pay-day, he is practically independent of his master. Mariners, I may add, seem by common consent to be always treated as children of a larger growth, and protected accordingly. The criterion after all must always be the majus bonum.

The Truck system is a term commonly used to denote the arrangement by which, directly or indirectly, workmen are compelled to take payment of their wages, or of advances made to them on their wages, not in money, but in goods furnished from the employers' stores or shops. But the same name has been given to a system that has long prevailed in Shetland, by which the dealings of many classes (tenants, fishermen, and workers of different kinds) are carried on by way of barter, with little or no use of money. This is a different sort of system from the ordinary method of truck between master and servant; and one which, in my humble opinion, is still more difficult to deal with. The modus operandi may be generally understood by a few illustrations. The Shetland farmer is, in the ordinary case, possessed of no capital, and seldom pays his rent in money. He is unable probably to support himself by any independent means until his small crop is reaped, or the produce of his farm ready to be realized. He is consequently obliged to seek assistance in the meantime by obtaining advances from some quarter or other. He is also, as a general rule, a fisherman on his own account, but having no capital, he is obliged to run in debt for his boat, or his share of a boat; and again he is obliged to resort to others to support himself and his family until the profits of his fishing can be realized. The employment of fishing is notoriously a precarious one, and introduces into his condition an element of chance and risk that operates powerfully to affect his dealings. It is not easy for a party in such circumstances to obtain advances or furnishings where these can only be accorded to him upon doubtful credit and at considerable hazard. The consequence has been that, for an immemorial period, the Shetlander has been chronically a debtor to others, as fishermen commonly are, and not unnaturally the party with whom he has to deal has come to be the proprietor of the land, or his factor or middleman. What might be done by a good or generous creditor in such circumstances, I shall not attempt to conjecture; but generosity is not a mercantile virtue, and if a dealer tries to make his own profit as great as possible, and still more if he is a greedy and unscrupulous man, the poor Shetlander is in a bad way. The dealer has him greatly in his power, both as to the quality and as to the nominal price of his goods; and no doubt much injustice may be done in this way. Another feature comes frequently into play. The females of the Shetlander's family occupy themselves in knitting

those delightful shawls and articles of hosiery with which we are acquainted, and these the women carry to certain dealers to dispose of; but here it is alleged, truly or falsely, that, by ways and means, these workers are induced almost invariably to take payment in goods consisting in great part of gay cotton prints, showy ribbons, and other articles of female dress or finery, not always well adapted either to their position or to their humid climate. Another favourite commodity for which their worsted work is exchanged is tea; and it is well known that high-priced tea is the great temptation which the Shetland women are unable to resist, tea-totalism in Shetland being often as much of a vice as it is thought a virtue elsewhere. When the dealers with whom the family has to do are all connected with the landlord or the land, the case becomes extremely complicated, and a further cause of mischief arises, as the Shetlander seldom or never has a lease, or will accept of one, and is thus under the constant fear of being ejected if he thwarts the proprietor or his representative in any of his transactions. It thus happens that a Shetland family may be industrious in all its branches-farming and fishing, and knitting to the best of their ability, and yet will be constantly behind hand, dependent upon their superior, and never perhaps handling a pound note from year's end to year's end. The dealers, on the other hand, are said to make large profits, at least at times; but whether on the whole they are great gainers it is not easy to tell, as the state of their transactions has never fully been brought to light. I am far from saying that all, or even the majority, of the landowners are mixed up in these transactions; but the system is so well established that it is difficult to keep free of it. This is certainly not a very good state of things. It has been said that the very boys when they begin to work for wages get no money, but are supplied with clothes, including specially a coat to go to church in, and thus they get very early into the merchant's books, so that perhaps it is not much of an exaggeration to say that a Shetlander is under truck from his cradle to his coffin. Much clamour and complaint have been excited by these pictures, and loud demands are made for stringent and special legislation. It is quite right that full inquiry should be made into the facts; but I confess I have little hope of seeing the evil cured by Act of Parlia ment. It would be preposterous to enact that no tenant who was starving should be assisted with advances except in money, or that no girl should exchange her woollen manufacture for a cotton print; nor, in like manner, would it be practicable to say that a tenant should not pay his rent in cattle or in fish. The evil lies deeper than this, viz., that the Shetlanders are trying to carry on the business of farming and of fishing without the necessary means. If the steed has to wait for his food till the grass grows he will probably starve; and so will the farmer come to grief if he has not something laid by to live upon between seed-time and harvest. It is the possession or the want of the capital that makes the great difference between master and servant, farmer and labourer. The man who cannot wait till the fruits of his labour or industry are realized, ought naturally to be a servant, and ought to receive wages or support independently of results; but in so doing he must forego the right to claim those profits which are to compensate for risk and delay. If the farmer or fisher insists on going on on his own account without any means-and it is plain that the Shetlander's feelings or habits are adverse to his becoming a servant-it is certain that he must become a borrower, and he will not get aid from any lender without ample remuneration. That remuneration may be got either by charging high interest, or, as they do in Shetland, by making their advances in such a form and manner as will yield them a mercantile profit. This system has been so long established in Shetland, that the people are in a great degree reconciled to it, and its extirpation seems scarcely possible. I think that if I were a resident Shetland proprietor, I would rather let the system go on, but endeavour that it should be so administered as to do justice to both parties, in the hope that by degrees a spirit of independence and fair dealing might grow up. I must say that I am very incredulous of any dealers getting, in this or in any other way, an exorbitant profit in the long run. For if that were the case, competition would be evoked, and one dealer would bid down or bid up the market till it reached a fair rate or return.

Pauperism.

I should regret if this Meeting should pass away without something being done

to bring before us in a precise shape the comparative principles and practical operations of the poor laws in England, Scotland, and Ireland-a subject undoubtedly of great interest and importance. In connexion with the subject of pauperism, one of the most important elements for consideration relates to private charity. It is certain that an enormous sum of money is annually distributed in that way throughout the kingdom, and it is equally certain that the good done bears little proportion to the amount given. It cannot be too much inculcated upon men's minds that the givers of indiscriminate charity are practically to be classed among the most mischievous enemies of the poor. The direct tendency of what they do is to tempt and encourage the poor to become hypocrites and impostors, to paralyze their industry, and to undermine their self-respect and self-reliance. It is false to call such expenditure by the name of charity. A great deal of it doubtless proceeds from feelings of true benevolence; but how much of it is prompted by other motives? The desire to do as others do, the wish to avoid the unpleasant sight of distress, real or apparent, the inability to resist importunity, the superstitious idea that it is a duty to give a portion of our means in the name of alms, without regard to the effect produced, just as the Pharisees were scrupulous to pay tithes down to the lowest article. Protestants are in the habit of reproaching Catholics with the importance they attach to mere good works; but that fault is not confined to Catholics, but is deeply seated in human nature. The false notion of expiating sins, or of propitiating Divine favour by some self-sacrifice that is perhaps easily made, prevails in all sects. A story was current some time ago of a man belonging to a very anti-Catholic sect, who had become rich by very questionable means, and who, when on his death-bed, asked his minister whether, if he gave £10,000 to the church, it would improve his prospects in the other world. The cautious and conciliatory answer was, that it was impossible to guarantee any such matter, but that it seemed an experiment well worth trying. No such liberality, whether in one's life-time or on death-bed, deserves the name of charity. There can be no charity unless there is the desire to do good to the recipient; and there can be no enlightened charity that does not seek to carry out that wish in the right way, by making careful inquiry as to the circumstances in which the boon is bestowed, and the effect which it is likely to have. It is not an easy task to accomplish this object; but I am glad to see that on all sides measures are being taken, by the help of associations and otherwise, to assist benevolent persons in wisely and intelligently carrying out their views. Two great considerations are here to be looked to the real destitution of the parties to whom charity is given, and the caution that confines it mainly to casual and extraordinary causes of distress, and does not establish any resource on which the poor can rely, so as to dispense with ordinary and necessary prudence on their part.

On Sanitary Measures for Scottish Villages.

By Colonel Sir J. E. ALEXANDER, K.C.L.S., F.R.S.E.

Within the last forty years there has been a gradual improvement in many Scottish villages, which by the absence of attention to the outward and visible signs of cleanliness, exhibited great carelessness in sanitary measures. Manure-heaps are still, no doubt, not far off from the cottages; but it is the business of the sanitary officers to see that they and pigsties are not close to doors or windows. Some of our health officers are firm and do their duty, and insist on attention to sanitary rules; others again wink at irregularities, and favour particular parties to the injury of their neighbours. There is still a vast amount of ignorance both as to the necessity for pure air and water to insure good health to the community.

In visiting the cottages we still see occasionally that fever-chest called a "boxbed," in which at night a father, mother, and two or three children may be found, with the air poisoned by their breath. We still see in many cottages windows built into the wall, and quite incapable of being opened. Landlords should endeavour to remedy this evil, as it costs little to make an arrangement for admitting air through the natural channel-the window. How can we expect to find healthi