irresponsibleauthoritiesliabletobebiasedbysinisterinterests’Bentham’ssacredphraseshould，nowbeconfidedtothecentralboardofcontrol，onwhichresponsibilityismoststronglyconcentrated，andwhichwillhavethemostextensiveinformation。’13*Thecompetitionbetweentheparisheshadproducedthetangledlawsofsettlement，leadingtoendlesslitigation：thedepopulationofsomeplaces，theovercrowdingofothers，thepeculationsandjobberyduetothe’sinisterinterests’ofpettylocalauthorities，andtheutterabsenceofanyuniformorrationalsystem。Tocompelthefifteenthousandbodiestosubstituteco-operationforcompetition，tochecktheiraccounts，andtoenforcegeneralrules，itwasnecessarytocreateacentralboardwithwideadministrativeauthority。Forsuchascheme，nowobviousenough，thecommissionersfoundtheironlyprecedentinameasurebywhichabarristerhadbeenappointedtoinspectsavingsbanksandfriendlysocieties。14*
Thenewpoor-lawwasthusa’centralising’measure，andmarkedamostimportantstepinthatdirection。Itwasdenouncedforthatreasononbothsides，andamongtheorthodoxeconomistsbyM’Culloch。J。S。Milldefendeditwarmlyagainstthis’irrationalclamour’；andbutforcertainrestraininginfluences，especiallytheteachingofTocqueville，wouldhethinkshavegoneintotheoppositeexcess。15*Itseems，however，thattheUtilitariansgenerallyacceptedthelawasajudiciousapplicationofMalthus，temperedbyproperregardforcircumstances。Theywereindeedboundinprincipletobeshyofthedirectapplicationofaprioriformula。YetitmayalsobebrieflynotedthatthiswasoneofthecasesonwhichtheUtilitariansunconsciouslyforwardedatendencytowhichtheyobjectedingeneralterms。Theywishedtocodifyandsimplifythepoor-law，andfounditnecessarytointroduceacentralregulatingbody。Thoughtheymeanttostimulatelocalactivity，theywerecallingthecentralauthorityintofreshactivity。
MeanwhiletheiropponentswereequallyreadytoseenothinginitbutMalthus，andtodenounceitwithcorrespondingbitterness。ItwascontrarytoChristianitytotherightsofman，andtothegoodoldlawsofEngland。Itwasapartofthemachinerybywhichcold-bloodedeconomistswereenslavingthepoor。Theoperative，saystheChartisthistorian，16*thoughtthatitbrokethelastlinkinthechainofsympathybetweenrichandpoor。Prison-likeworkhouseswererisingtoremindthepooroftheir’comingdoom。’Theycouldexpectnothingbut’miseryinthepresent，andtheBastilleinthefuture，inwhichtheyweretobeimmuredwhentheirrichoppressornolongerrequiredtheirservices。’Thehistorianofthefactorymovement17*confirmsthisstatement。Thepoormanwastoworkorstarve。Poverty，then，wastobetreatedasacrime。Theparochialsystemwastobebrokenup，andtheclergythusseparatedfromthepoor。Thewholesystemwasanti-Christian：hadnotthecommissionersputoutawarningagainstalms-giving？18*Thecommissionersagainproposedtheemigrationofpauperisedagriculturallabourersintomanufacturingdistricts，andweresoplayingintothehandsofthecapitalists。Cobbett’sviewgavethekeynotetoanotherversionofthecase。Hesawasclearlyasanyonetheevilsofpauperisation，buttheoldlawatleastadmittedthepoorman’srighttosupport。Ingoodoldtimeshehadbeensupportedbythechurch。ThegreatrobberyattheReformationhadbeenpartlycompensatedbythepoor-law。Toabolishorrestricttheoldrightwastoconsummatetheabominablerobberyandtofleecethepoormanmorethoroughlyatthebiddingof’parsonMalthus。’Cobbett’sviewnotonlycommendeditselftohisownclass，butwasmoreorlessthatofthe’YoungEnglanders，’whoaspiredtoareconstructionoftheoldsocialorder。TheTimesdenouncedthenewlawbitterly，anditsproprietor，Walter，thoughtasKyddsays，andnodoubtthoughtrightly，thattheindignationrousedbythemeasurehaddonemuchtofosterChartism。19*Meanwhile，toMillandhisfriendsthewholeofthisdeclamationcameundertheheadofthelater’sentimentalism。’TheyheldwithMalthusthatanunlimitedrighttosupportmeantanindefinitemultiplicationofpoverty。Toadmittherightwastoundertakeanimpossibletaskandprovokearevolutiononitsinevitablefailure。Rightmustbebaseduponfact；anditisidletoneglecttheinevitableconditionsofhumanlife。Thispositionmightbelogicallyunassailable；andthemeasuresupportedonthestrengthofitisnowadmittedtohavebeenavastreform。Itcametobecitedasoneoftheclaimstogratitudeoftheeconomists。Theirsciencehadarrestedanevilwhichappearedtobealmostincurable。Soundreasonhadagaintriumphedovervaguesentimentalism。Thenewlawwas，however，stillgivenasanillustrationoftheheartlessnessofpoliticaleconomists。Mill，whomightclaimjustlythathewasasanxiousasanyonetoraisethepoor，hadsorrowfullytoadmitthatthemassesweretooignorantandtheirleaderstoosentimentaltorecognisehisgoodintentions。Theytookthesurgeonforanassassin。
Amongtheenemiesofthenewpoor-lawwerethekeenestagitatorsforfactorylegislation。Thesuccessionofleadersinthatmovementischaracteristic。TheearlymeasuresintroducedbythefirstSirRobertPeelandsupportedbyOwenhadbeententativeandoflimitedapplication。Asademandaroseformoredrasticmeasures，thefirstbillwasintroducedin1831byJohnCamHobhouse1786-1869，afterwardsLordBroughton。Hobhouse’selectionforWestminsterin1820hadbeenatriumphfortheBenthamites；andhewasafterwardsoneofthemembersthroughwhomPlacetriedtoinfluencelegislation。HobhousewastoomuchofthearistocrattobeuptoPlace’sstandardofRadicalism，andonthispointhewastoomuchofaneconomisttoleadthemovement。Hedeclaredthedemandsoftheagitatorstobehopelesslyunpractical；or，asOastlerputit，gaveinto’thecold，calculating，butmistakenScottishphilosophers，’whohadanoverwhelminginfluenceonthecountry。20*TheleadpassedtoMichaelThomasSadler1780-1835。Sadler，aToryandanevangelical，hadproposedtointroducethepoor-lawsystemintoIreland。HehadattackedMalthus1830inabooktobepresentlynoticed。HedeclaredthatHobhousehadsurrenderedtotheeconomists，whowere’thepestsofsocietyandthepersecutorsofthepoor。’21*Henowproposedamorestringentmeasure，whichledtotheappointmentofacommitteeoftheHouseofCommonsin1832。Thereportpresented8thAugust1832startledandshockedthepublic。Aroyalcommissionwasappointedin1833tocollectfurtherevidence。SadlerhadmeanwhilebeendefeatedbyMacaulayinasharpcontestforLeeds。Hishealthsoonafterwardsbrokedown，underthestrainofcarryingontheagitation，andtheleadfelltoLordShaftesburythenLordAshley。Shaftesbury，again，asanaristocratandanevangelical，wasanaturalenemyoftheUtilitarian。HewasheartilyapprovedbySouthey，fromthestudyofwhoseworksheprofessedhimselftohave’derivedthegreatestbenefit。’Hethoughtthatthecountrywas’droopingunderthechillyblastsofpoliticaleconomy，’andregardedthemillowneras’thecommonenemyoftheoperativesandthecountry-gentleman。’22*RichardOastler，themosteffectiveandpopularorganiseroftheagitationoutsideofparliament，wasalsoaTory，achurchman，andaprotectionist。Hehadjoinedintheanti-slaverymovement，andnowthoughtthatthefactorysysteminvolvedaworseslaverythanthatofthenegro。Heacceptedthetitleof’kingofthefactories，’giveninridiculebyhisenemies。23*HebecameamartyrtohishatredofthenewPoor-lawbyresigninghisplaceasagenttoanestateratherthanenforceitsprovisions。He，too，hatedtheeconomists，anddenounced，thehorribleMalthusiandoctrine，’whichhetooktobethatthe’Creatorsentchildrenintotheworldwithoutbeingabletofindfoodforthem。’24*JohnFielden，whobecametheparliamentaryleaderin1846，uponShaftesbury’stemporaryretirementfromtheHouse，hadbeenbroughtupasaQuakerandaTory。HebecameaUtilitarianandaRadical。ThetypicalRadicalforhimwasnotPlacebutCobbett，hiscolleagueforOldhaminthefirstreformedparliament。’HonestJohnFielden’madeafortunebycotton-spinning，butwroteatractcalledtheCurseoftheFactorySystem，andnodoubtsharedCobbett’shatredoftheScottish’philosophers’andParsonMalthus。
Thesebriefindicationsmaybesufficientforonepoint。Theagitatorsonbehalfofthefactorymovementtookthepoliticaleconomists，’Malthusians，’andUtilitarianstobetheirnaturalandtheirmostdangerousenemies。Theyassumedthattheeconomistdoctrinemightbecondensedintothesinglemaxim’donothing。’
Whetheritwereaquestionofencouragingtradeorsupportingthepoor，orputtingdown’whiteslavery’inafactory，governmentwastoleavethingsaloneor，inotherwords，toleavethemtothedevil。Chalmers，thoughanultra-Malthusianinsomerespects，approvedthefactorymovement，because，ashesaid，itwasaquestionbetweenfreetradeandChristianity。25*Christianityordersustohelpourneighbours，andpoliticaleconomytoletthemalone。Mill，ofcourse，wouldhaverepudiatedthisdoctrine。
Politicaleconomy，hewouldhavereplied，doesnotforbidustodogood，oritwouldbeopposedtoUtilitarianismaswellastoChristianity。Itonlyshowsuswhatwilldogoodbypointingouttheconsequencesofouractions，andChristianitycanscarcelyforbidustodisregardconsequences。Nor，infact，wasittruethattheeconomistsunequivocallycondemnedthefactoryacts。
Malthushadapprovedthem，andM’CullochwrotewarmlytoShaftesburytoexpresshissympathy。
Undoubtedly，however，theoppositiontothefactorylegislationappealedtotheprinciplesacceptedandmostvigorouslyenforcedbytheUtilitarians。Itcamefromthefree-traders，andfromtheinnercircleoforthodoxtheorists。Inthelaterdebates，BrightandCobden，VilliersandMilner-Gibson，Bowring，Bentham’strusteddisciple，Roebuck，awayward，thoughatfirstaneager，follower，andthesturdyJosephHumewerejealousopponents。TheEdinburghandtheWestminsterReviewsrivalledeachotherinorthodoxy。26*TheEdinburghdeclaredJuly1835thatSadler’sfamousreportwasfulloffalsestatements，ifnotwhollyfalse；andtheWestminsterApril1833
thoughtthatitwas’astalkinghorse’todivertattentionfromtheagitationagainstthecorn-lawsandslavery。Fraser’sMagazine，onthecontrary，whichwasattackingtheeconomistsinaseriesofarticles，madeaspecialpointofthehorrorsrevealedbythereport。Theymightbesummedupas’childmurderbyslowtorture。’TheToryorgans，theQuarterlyandBlackwood，tookthesameside。Themanufacturersdeniedtheexistenceoftheevilsalleged，complainedofspiesandunfairreports，andtauntedthelandownerswithneglectofthesufferingagriculturallabourers。Shaftesburysays27*thattheargumentmostfrequentlyusedwasafamousstatementbySenior。Thathighauthorityhaddeclaredthatalltheprofitsofmanufacturersweremadeinthelasttwohoursofthetwelve。Cutdownthetwelvetoten，andprofitswoulddisappear，andwiththemthemanufacturingindustry。28*Thesamedoctrine，infact，workedintoavarietyofforms，sometimesfittedforpracticalmen，andsometimesseekingthedignityofscientificformulation，wasthemainargumenttobemet。Thisis，infact，typicaloftheeconomists’
position。Someofthemmadeconcessions，andsomeoftheWhigsshrankfromtherigiddoctrine。29*Butitwasmoreintheirway，atleast，tosupply’chillingblasts’ofcriticismthantogiveanywarmsupport。Onequalificationmustbenoticed。Theagitationbeganfromtheundeniablecrueltytochildren。Theenthusiast’sviewwasputintoepigrammaticformbyMichelet。ThemonsterPitthadboughtthemanufacturers’supportbytheawfulphrase，’takethechildren。’30*Inrealitytheemploymentofchildrenhadatfirstappeareddesirablefromaphilanthropicpointofview；butithaddevelopedsoastoinvolveintolerablecruelty。Thehideousstoriesofchildrenworkedtodeath，ortoprematuredecrepitude，revealedbythecommissionshadmadeaprofoundimpression。SofartheUtilitariansasmoralistswereboundandwillingtoprotest。Theyhatedslavery，andtodonothingwastopermitthemostdetestableslavery。Achildoftenderyearsmightbeworkedtodeathbybrutalemployerswiththehelpofcarelessparents。Thiswasfullyadmitted，forexample，byCobden，whosaidthatheentirelyapprovedoflegislationforchildren，butheldequallythatadultsshouldbeencouragedtolookforhelptothemselvesandnottogovernment。31*Eventhestraitesteconomistsseemtohaveadmittedsomuch。Theproblem，however，remainedastotheprincipleuponwhichthelinemustbedrawn。Ifhelplesschildrenshouldbeprotected，havenotwomen，orevenworkingmenindependentpositions，anequalrighttoprotection？Moreover，caninterferenceinonecasebepracticallycarriedoutwithoutinvolvinginterferenceinthewholesystem？