sary information. Every such surgeon who rises to eminence, must have risen to it through the suffering which he has inflicted, and the death which he has brought upon hundreds of the poor. The effect of the entire abolition of the practice of dissecting the dead, would be, to convert poor-houses and public hospitals into so many schools where the surgeon, by practising on the poor, would learn to operate on the rich with safety and dexterity. This would be the certain and inevitable result: and this, indeed, would be to treat them with real indignity, and horrible injustice; and proves, how possible it is to show an apparent consideration for the poor, and yet practically to treat them in the most injurious and cruel manner.

Nor would the proposed plan be the means of deterring this class of people from entering the hospitals. There is something reasonable in the apprehension on which this objection is founded but the answer to it is complete, because it is an answer, derived from experience, to an objection, which is merely a deduction from what is probable. The plan has been acted on, and found to be unattended with this result: it was tried in Edinburgh, and the hospital was as full as it is at present it is universally acted on in France, and the hospitals are always crowded.

The great advantages of the plan are, that it would accomplish the proposed object, easily and completely, whereas the plan in operation effects it imperfectly and with difficulty; and it would put an immediate and entire stop to all the evils of the present system. At once it would put an end to the needless education of daring and desperate violators of the law. It would tranquillize the public mind. Their dead would rest undisturbed: the sepulchre would be sacred and all the horrors which the imagination connects with its violation would cease for ever.

We have stated, that the plan has been tried. Experience has proved its efficacy. It was adopted with perfect success in Edinburgh more than a century ago. In the Council Register for 1694, it is recorded that all unclaimed dead bodies in the charitable institutions or in the streets, were given for dissection to the College of Surgeons, to one or two of its individual members, and to the professor of anatomy. This regulation, at that period, excited no opposition on the part of the people, but effectually answered the desired object. All the medical schools on the continent are supplied with subjects, by public authority, in a similar manner. We have obtained from a friend in Paris, a gentleman who is at the head of the anatomical department in that city, the following account of the

manner in which the schools of anatomy are supplied. It is stated; 1. That the faculty of medicine at Paris is authorized to take from the civil hospitals, from the prisons, and from the dépôts of mendicity, the bodies which are necessary for teaching anatomy. 2. That a gratuity of eight-pence is given to the attendants in the hospitals for each body. 3. That upon the foundation by the National Convention, of schools of health, the statutes of their foundation declare, that the subjects necessary for the schools of anatomy shall be taken from the hospitals, and that since this period, the council of hospitals and the prefect of police, have always permitted the practice. 4. That M. Breschet, chief of the anatomical department of the faculty of Paris, sends a carriage daily to the different hospitals, which brings back the necessary number of bodies that this number has sometimes amounted to 2000 per annum, for the faculty only, without reckoning those used in L'Hôpital de la Pitié, but that since the general attention which has recently been bestowed upon pathologic anatomy, numbers of bodies are opened in the civil and military hospitals, and that the faculty seldom obtain more than 1000 or 1200. 5. That, besides the dissections by the faculty of medicine, and those pursued in L'Hôpital de la Pitié, theatres of anatomy are opened in all the great hospitals, for the pupils of those establishments: that in these institutions anatomy is carefully taught, and that pupils have all the facilities for dissection that can be desired. 6. That the price of a body varies from four shillings to eight shillings and sixpence. 7. That after dissection, the bodies are wrapt in cloths, and carried to the neighbouring cemetery, where they are received for ten-pence. 8. That the practice of exhumation is abolished: that there are insurmountable obstacles to the return to that system, and that bodies are never taken from burial grounds, without an order for exhumation, which is given only when the tribunals require it for the purpose of medico-legal investigations. 9. That though the people have an aversion to the operations of dissection, yet they never make any opposition to them, provided respect be paid to the laws of decency and salubrity, on account of the deep conviction that prevails of their utility. 10. That the relatives of the deceased seldom or never oppose the opening of any body, if the physicians desire it. That all the medical students in France, with scarcely any exception, dissect, and that that physician or surgeon who is not acquainted with anatomy, is universally regarded as the most ignorant of men.

It is time that the physicians and surgeons of England, should exert themselves to change a system which has so long

retarded the progress of their science, and been productive of so much evil to the community. We are persuaded, that there is good sense enough, both in the people and in the legislature, to listen to their representations. We would advise them to avail themselves of the means they possess to communicate information to the people, and to make individual members of parliament acquainted with the subject. With this view we would recommend the whole body to act in concert, to appoint a committee for conducting the matter, and to petition parliament, as soon as they shall have made the nature of their claims, and the grounds on which they rest, more generally known. If they act in co-operation with each other, and pursue their object temperately, and steadily, we cannot but believe, that their efforts at no distant period, will be crowned with

success.

ART. IV. Eighth Report of the Commissioners appointed by Parliament to inquire respecting Charities. 14 February, 1823. THE universal prevalence of benevolent feelings is so essential to the well-being of mankind, that it will not be deemed a fruitless task if we can shew in what manner such feelings may best be cultivated and directed, in order to be productive of the greatest possible good. In making the attempt, we shall, perhaps, find it necessary to quit the ordinary and beaten track, and to take a new view of many institutions which it has hitherto been the custom to reverence and admire. But as our only object, is to promote the general happiness, and as all these institutions are established avowedly for that purpose, we feel the less reluctant in publishing the opinions which we have formed respecting them. We are confident, likewise, that our readers will not reject any doctrine merely on account of its novelty, but that they will be willing to give an attentive and impartial consideration, before they pronounce any judgment upon the merits or demerits of what we may have to adduce. We are the more incited to undertake this task, because we know that many persons, willing and anxious to exert themselves in bettering the condition of the poorer classes, despair of being able to effect any permanent good. They see the number of charitable institutions daily increasing, and the mass of human misery apparently undiminished: from this they argue, that interference on their part would be vain. They despond, therefore, and remain idle. One of our objects, and that one not the least important, is, to furnish a motive for exertion to such

1

as are now passive, and, if possible, to rouse them into activity, by pointing out in what way they may render the most extensive and lasting services to mankind.

While charity and charitable feelings are so generally recommended, we must never forget the real import of the terms. "Charitable" is defined by Dr. Johnson, who may be looked upon as good authority for the popular signification of words, to be "1. Kind in giving alms; liberal to the poor. 2. Kind in judging of others; disposed to tenderness; benevolent." But of what use is the greatest kindness-the most profuse liberality, unless the exercise of these feelings be followed by beneficial effects? A person may be endowed with a heart overflowing with the milk of human kindness,' and be the occasion of much more extensive mischief than the most hardened villain. The laws in any tolerably governed state limit the powers of the latter, but the former unfortunately is often encouraged in his career by the approbation of all in whose opinion he desires to stand well. Such a man by an indiscriminate alms-giving may be the promoter of idleness and beggary, the patron of deception and vice, and so far as he holds out a premium for what is bad, an actual diminisher of the sum of good.

:

When we say that benevolence is useless or mischievous without knowledge, we do not make use of the word knowledge in its vulgar sense. We do not comprise under that word the superficial and ornamental acquirements which command so much esteem in aristocratical society; nor that faculty of scanning Greek chorusses, and writing Latin hexameters, upon which so much value is set at a public school or university but we include in our sense of the word, that sort of information alone, which enables a man to be of service to his species. The value set upon a member of society should not be according to the fineness or intensity of his feelings, to the acuteness of his sensibility, or to his readiness to weep for, and deplore the misery he may meet with in the world; but in proportion to the sacrifices which he is ready to make, and to the knowledge and talents which he is able and willing to contribute towards removing this misery. To benefit mankind is a much more difficult task than some persons seem to imagine: it is not quite so easy as to make a display of amiable sensibility. The first requires long study and perseverance, and sometimes painful abstinence from the various alluring pleasures by which we are surrounded. The second, in most cases, demands only a little acting; but even when sincere, is utterly useless to the public.

The ways in which it has been attempted to administer to the wants, and to relieve the distresses of the poor are so numerous;-and the compassion of the more highly favoured part of mankind for the remainder, has manifested itself in so many different shapes, as well in private charities as in public institutions, that it would be incompatible with our limits to notice them all. This, however, is unnecessary, our purpose being merely to point out the characteristic distinctions between a good and bad distribution of the means of happiness. The few instances which we shall select in order to illustrate

our observations, will serve as a guide to determine the merits of the rest; and obviate the necessity of fatiguing the reader with tedious and uninteresting details concerning particular charities. To convince the public, twenty or thirty years ago, of the goodness of a charity, it was sufficient to shew that the objects relieved were in a state of real distress. Effectual security against imposture was all that was demanded; and the existence of that security being ascertained, the benefit conferred upon society was considered to be placed beyond all doubt.

But now, that the circumstances are more generally known, on which the condition of the labouring classes depends, all former reasonings on the subject of charity, as well as on many other subjects, are invalidated. Previously, therefore, to entering upon our main inquiry, it is necessary to state concisely what those circumstances are.

The condition of the labouring classes with regard to the necessaries and comforts of life, is evidently determined by the rate of wages; and this again depends upon the proportion of their numbers to the demand for labour. The smaller the numbers, therefore, to be employed by a given amount of capital, the greater will be their command over the means of happiness.' If the capital, destined to the maintenance of labourers, is 20 millions of pounds, and the number of labourers 1 million, the yearly wages of the labourers, one with another, will be £.20 per man-if 2 millions .10 per man. The capital being given, it depends upon the number of the labourers, whether. they are to subsist upon bread and meat and to dwell in wholesome cottages, or to live upon potatoes in mud cabins.

Population, however, if adequately supplied with food, would double every 20 or 25 years: but it is impossible to increase food at that rate, for any considerable length of time. Hence the conclusion is obvious, that population has a tendency to increase faster than capital. This is the principle of population, a principle of which it is impossible to exaggerate the import

ance.

H 2