ng of Miss Octavia Hill, led to the foundation
of the system of friendly visiting and associated charity at Boston
(1880) and elsewhere. Since that time the influence of Arnold Toynbee
and the investigations of Charles Booth have led to a better
appreciation of the conditions of labour; and to some extent, in London
and elsewhere, the spirit of charity has assumed the form of a new
devotion to the duties of citizenship. But perhaps, in regard to charity
in Great Britain, the most important change has been the revival of the
teaching of Dr Chalmers (1780-1847), who (1819) introduced a system of
parochial charity at St John's, Glasgow, on independent lines,
consistent with the best traditions of the Scottish church. In the
development of the theory of charitable relief on the economic side this
has been a main factor. His view, which he tested by experience, may be
summed up as follows: Society is a growing, self-supporting organism. It
has within it, as between family and family, neighbour and neighbour,
master and employee, endless links of sympathy and self-support. Poverty
is not an absolute, but a relative term. Naturally the members of one
class help one another; the poor help the poor. There is thus a large
invisible fund available and constantly used by those who, by their
proximity to one another, know best how to help. The philanthropist is
an alien to this life around him. Moved by a sense of contrast between
his own lot, as he understands it, and the lot of those about him, whom
he but little understands, he concludes that he should relieve them. But
his gift, unless it be given in such a way as to promote this
self-support, instead of weakening it, is really injurious. In the first
place, by his interference he puts a check on the charitable resources
of another class and lessens their social energy. What he gives they do
not give, though they might do so. But next, he does more harm than
this. He stimulates expectation, so that by a false arithmetic his gift
of a few shillings seems to those who receive it and to those who hear
of it a possible source of help in any difficulty. To them it represents
a large command of means; and where one has received what, though it be
little, is yet, relative to wage, a large sum to be acquired without
labour, many will seek more, and with that object will waste their time
and be put off their work, or even be tempted to lie and cheat. So
social energy is diverted from its p