COMPULSORY CHARITY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13484, 10 May 1907, Page 4

COMPULSORY CHARITY.

The doubt exists in many minds—some of them the minds of persons of great practical experience—and crops up pretty frequently in threats— are considered almost immoral—that wealthy people will meet the new demand for legal charity by shutting off the voluntary charities of which they have hitherto made a practice. Philanthropy,,^is alleged, is being pushed too far, so far that there is some danger of its interfering both with civilisation and with certain elementary principles of justice—for instance, that, man has a right to the " solitary and selfish" use. of that which ; he" himself creates. No increase of wealth is possible if the whole surplus of what is produced by intellectual toil is to be paid away to those who want, and even the payment of a great portion may seriously diminish the energy both of giver and receiver, which in the aggregate is the force that keeps the world in the groove of material progress. For this doubt (says the London Spectator) there are at least some reasons of apparent validity. The argument which is constantly pleaded by all socialists, and is accepted silently by the more despotic philanthropists, that no limit can be fixed to the right of a community to deprive any class of its surplus beyond bare maintenance, is rejected not only by the selfish, but by many who think. It certainly was not a principle laid down by Christ, for He made of philanthropy • a virtue, and involuntary virtues are unthinkable. They are not virtues unless the action they ; suggest is sanctioned by free will. The right of the community to take the whole surplus from everyone may be perfectly clearit would be admitted, for instance, in the case of famine or invasion—-but special demands on a special class are precisely like special demands on an individual; that is, unless justified by some plea like national safety, they may involve in reality pillage. Against such pillage those who are threatened feel that they have a right of self-de-fence, and the self-defence of those who are capable of guiding has very rarely in history been found futile. Since the foundation of history, indeed, the masses have had the power of strangling the classes with their bare hands, and have never yet found in themselves the force to constitute a permanent system of economic equality. Even the French were obliged to give up the effort as too great for human nature. ■-,