try-side, and stamps the whole company sent with disgrace.
These cases we always hear of. The lives of poor children in these homes
seem like the annals of great States in this, that, when they make no
report and pass in silence, then we may be sure happiness and virtue are
the rule. When they make a noise, crime and misery prevail. Twenty
years' virtuous life in a street-boy makes no impression on the public.
A single offense is heard for hundreds of miles. A theft of one lad is
imputed to scores of others about him.

The children are not indentured, but are free to leave, if ill-treated
or dissatisfied; and the farmers can dismiss them, if they find them
useless or otherwise unsuitable.

This apparently loose arrangement has worked well, and put both sides on
their good behavior. We have seldom had any cases brought to our
attention of ill-treatment. The main complaint is, that the older lads
change places often. This is an unavoidable result of a prosperous
condition of the laboring classes. The employers, however, are
ingenious, and succeed often, by little presents of a calf, or pony, or
lamb, or a small piece of land, in giving the child a permanent interest
in the family and the farm.

On the whole, if the warm discussion between the "Asylum-interest" and
the "Emigration-party" were ever renewed, probably both would agree (if
they were candid) that their opponents' plan had virtues which they did
not then see. There are some children so perverse, and inheriting such
bad tendencies, and so stamped with the traits of a vagabond life, that
a Reformatory is the best place for them. On the other hand, the
majority of orphan, deserted, and neglected boys and girls are far
better in a country home. The Asylum has its great dangers, and is very
expensive. The Emigration-plan must be conducted with careful judgment,
and applied, so far as is practicable, to children under, say, the age
of fourteen years. Both plans have defects, but, of the two, the latter
seems to us still to do the most good at the least cost.

A great obstacle in our own particular experience was, as was stated
before, the superstitious opposition of the poor. This is undoubtedly
cultivated by the priests, who seem seldom gifted with the broad spirit
of humanity of their brethren in Europe. They apparently desire to keep
the miserable masses here under their personal influence.

Our action, however, in regard to these waifs, has always been fair an