THE HOMELESS POOR OF LONDON.

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 146, 21 June 1889, Page 2

THE HOMELESS POOR OF LONDON.

In a great measure owing to the remarkabl e reception given to Henry George in Eng. land, who is at present addressing crowded and enthusiastic audiences in different parts of the United Kingdom on the great problem of industrial poverty, the subject matter of his discourses has been taken up by the English House of Commons, and two discussions took place there in one nighb on the position of the toilers of London, their work, their misery, their wrongs, and their rights. This in itself is a very significant sign of the times. One swallow does not make a summer, and one discussion on such a subject in Parliament will not settle the question satisfactorily; but ib is quite a new departure for the British Parliament to take matters of this sore into its •serious consideration, and that it has now done so, is a convincing proof that the Henry George asrifcution is beginning to assume an aspect of some importance in the Old Country.

The discussion on the question in the House of Commons does not appear to have led to any definite or practical result, most of the speakers enlarging on bhe astounding and miserably degrading facts that were brought before them, but all falling short wlien any attempt was made to propound a remedy. The "Pall Mall Gazette," commenting on the debate, says : " Our population is increasing at the rate of 1,000, persons per. day. In twenty years eighb millions will be added to tho

number of inhabitants in these crowded islands. What i3to be done with them ? How are they to be fed ? The problem is so serious, and it may at any time become so pressing, that there is no suggestion which promises a solution, however desperate, that will not be eagerly discussed. No considerations of morality or of prejudice are likely to stand in the way of the adoption of any scheme which offers the nation a way of escape from the impending catastrophe."

These are significant words ; the increase of population, which, under right conditions, should be looked upon and accepted as distinct evidence of national progress and national glory, is here alluded to as an impending catastrophe. Mr Seton-Kerr, one of the members, cynically observed in the course of tho debate, "There is no Yellow rtiver hero in this country as there was in China to reduce the population by seven millions ab ono time." To this certainty there were crie3 of, "Oh, oh," but the "Pall Mall Gazette" says: "There were probably not a few there who in their heart of hearts felt that after all it might be convenient to improvise a substitute for a Yellow River." Ib appears thab bhere are upwards of three hundred thousand people in London, just about equal to half of the whole population of New Zealand, who are never properly housed, never properly feci, and never properly rested, and in the bad times they suffer actual starvation, relieved only by the charity of bheir neighbours.

From the general tone of the English press and the tone of the Parliamentary debate on the subject, it would appear that to look for an honest and satisfactory solution of this great problem is almost hopeless. As the " Pall Mall Gazette observes, "No considerations of morality or of prejudice are likely to stand in the way of any scheme proposed to escape the impending evil," and so we find that devices for checking the increase of the population carry with them at present most favour. One of the most prominent of these checks is that of postponing marriage, another the limitation of families, find yet another most sinister proposal ia thab connected with the name of Air Albert White, and familiarly known as the "sterilisation of the unfit." Meantime, Henry George is travelling aboub preaching a doctrine and finding greab favour with his audiences, in which he endeavours to prove that the great problem can be solved by fair, moral, legitimate, and very simple means, namely, by making tho landowners pay a fair rent for the value of bhe land occupied by them, and thus cause ib to be utilised by the present owners bo the best advantage or oc cupied by those w ho will utilise it.

The only moral and legitimabo way for Britain to free herself of her surplus population is, of course, emigration. Dealing with the land of the United Kingdom, as the French did a .hundred years ago with bhe land of bheir nobiliby, would ab onco solve the problem ab homoof bhe agricultural labourer question, but the annual increase of population must leave tho old country as there is no room for bhein there. But this is no new thing. What would have been bhe condition of the population of Greab Britain at the present day had there been no outlet for her population in America, Canada, Australia, Africa, New Zealand and elsewhere ? And are those colonies unable to receive any further increase to their population ? They are quite capable of receiving and profitably sustaining any surplus Britain can send them for many generations ; but, unfortunately, precisely the same conditions bhab prevail in Britain, debarring her inhabibants from benefibbing bo tho fullest extent from her land, also rulo more or less in all the colonies and in bhe United Sbat.es. It is not thab New Zealund, for instance, could nob carry wibh ease ben or twenty times the population that she ha 3at present if they were settled on tho land, but our circumstances are such, through land monopoly and other causes, thab unless an emigrant arrives with ample private means, he simply swells the ranks of those seeking remunerative employment, and at present this colony is not in a position to satisfy tho needs and requirements of those needing employment now resident in ib.

The cold-blooded proposal to deliberately check by prudential means the increase of population, is contrary to all Divine and natural laws. Ib is a Conservative suggestion, with the main object of strictly conserving class interests. It means that the class which has monopolised the land, and thoso living on and through thab monopoly, those known, in facb, as bhe privileged classes, are to enjoy unrestricted all the blessings of family life, which in its true and perfect stabe'is bhe highest, and noblest and holiest state to which man can attain on earth : bub bhose who are landless, the toilers and workers who are necessary to minister to the needs and luxuries of the higher class, are not to marry because by doing so they increase in a highly objectionable manner, faster than their masters can provide for them. It is not for them to realise the joy of the married stabe—ib is bheirs to live a life of hard unceasing toil and social degradation ; and thus it comes about that even in enlightened Christian England, in this progressive nineteenth century, " storilisabion of the unfit" is seriously proposed to check the increase of that numerous portion of the population who, houseless, homeless, landless, and hopeless, still persist in obeying the Divine command to increase and multiply.