CHARITABLE ORGANISATION. [To THE EDITOR OF THE " $PECTATOR."J SIR,—I
have read with great interest the article of your correspondent on the charitable organisation of the Canton of Bile. From that article it appears that forty-five separate
objects are included in the work of one society, which has an income of £3,000 and a fund of £8,000. With all due respect to the excellent individuals who form this society, and to the principles which have united them for so many good purposes, we should like to hear a little as to the successful results achieved in each of the forty-five branches of work which occupy the attention of the society, and as to the way in which the money is distributed. To say the truth, £3,000 does not appear to be a very large sum, and if divided by forty-five, would barely allot 266 to each department of the work.
No, Sir, the cumbrous English system, in spite of its many defects, works best, if we may judge by the results achieved, and for this simple reason, that it is more in accordance with human nature. No nine humane gentlemen in the world could feel an equally keen interest in forty-five different charities. There is, probably, not a county town, certainly not a county, in England, where a larger aggregate sum is not collected, and where the work of, say, forty-five societies is not carried on by those who are most interested in their own department of beneficence. While one man is wild about washhouses, another is of opinion that nothing is so much needed as a hospital dispensary.
It is true that the English system involves a:slightly increased expenditure of paper and envelopes. But even this is good for trade, and exercises the public, who are asked to give, in the virtue of patience. I could say more, but forbear.—I am,
Sir, &c., EDWARD LIDDELL.
Previous page
