In Darkest England and The Way Out [120]
of the existing traders it might be impossible for the State to establish it, excepting at a ruinous expense. There would be no difficulty, however, of instituting a private Mont de Piete, which would confer an incalculable boon upon the struggling poor.
Further, I am by no means indisposed to recognise the necessity of dealing with this subject in connection with the Labour Bureau, provided that one clearly recognised principle can be acted upon. That principle is that a man shall be free to bind himself as security for the repayment of a loan, that is to pledge himself to work for his rations until such time as he has repaid capital and interest. An illustration or two will explain what I mean. Here is a carpenter who comes to our Labour shed; he is an honest, decent man, who has by sickness or some other calamity been reduced to destitution. He has by degrees pawned one article after another to keep body and soul together, until at last he has been compelled to pawn his tools. We register him, and an employer comes along who wants a carpenter whom we can recommend. We at once suggest this man, but then arises this difficulty. He has no tools; what are we to do? As things are at present, the man loses the job and continues on our hands. Obviously it is most desirable in the interest of the community that the man should get his tools out of pawn; but who is to take the responsibility of advancing the money to redeem them? This difficulty might be met, I think, by the man entering into a legal undertaking to make over his wages to us, or such proportion of them as would be convenient to his circumstances, we in return undertaking to find him in food and shelter until such time as he has repaid the advance made. That obligation it would be the truest kindness to enforce with Rhadamantine severity. Until the man is out of debt he is not his own master. All that he can make over his actual rations and Shelter money should belong to his creditor. Of course such an arrangement might be varied indefinitely by private agreement; the repayment of instalments could be spread ever a longer or shorter time, but the mainstay of the whole principle would be the execution of a legal agreement by which the man makes over the whole product of his labour to the Bank until he has repaid, his debt.
Take another instance. A clerk who has been many years in a situation and has a large family, which he has brought up respectably and educated. He has every prospect of retiring in a few years upon a superannuating allowance, but is suddenly confronted by a claim often through no fault of his own, of a sum of fifty or a hundred pounds, which is quite beyond his means. He has been a careful saving man, who has never borrowed a penny in his life, and does not know where to turn in his emergency. If he can not raise this money he will be sold up, his family will be scattered, his situation and his prospective pension will be lost, and blank ruin will stare him in the face. Now, were he in receipt of an income of ten times the amount, he would probably have a banking account, and, in consequence, be able to secure an advance of all he needed from his banker. Why should he not be able to pledge his salary, or a portion of it, to an Institution which would enable him to pay off his debt, on terms that, while sufficiently remunerative to the bank, would not unduly embarrass him?
At present what does the poor wretch do? He consults his friends, who, it is quite possible, are as hard up as himself, or he applies to some loan agency, and as likely as not falls into the hands of sharpers, who indeed, let him have the money, but at interest altogether out of proportion to the risk which they run, and use the advantage which their position gives them to extort every penny he has. A great black book written within and without in letters of lamentation, mourning, and woe might be written on the dealings of these usurers with their victims in every land.
It is of little service denouncing these extortioners. They have always existed,
Further, I am by no means indisposed to recognise the necessity of dealing with this subject in connection with the Labour Bureau, provided that one clearly recognised principle can be acted upon. That principle is that a man shall be free to bind himself as security for the repayment of a loan, that is to pledge himself to work for his rations until such time as he has repaid capital and interest. An illustration or two will explain what I mean. Here is a carpenter who comes to our Labour shed; he is an honest, decent man, who has by sickness or some other calamity been reduced to destitution. He has by degrees pawned one article after another to keep body and soul together, until at last he has been compelled to pawn his tools. We register him, and an employer comes along who wants a carpenter whom we can recommend. We at once suggest this man, but then arises this difficulty. He has no tools; what are we to do? As things are at present, the man loses the job and continues on our hands. Obviously it is most desirable in the interest of the community that the man should get his tools out of pawn; but who is to take the responsibility of advancing the money to redeem them? This difficulty might be met, I think, by the man entering into a legal undertaking to make over his wages to us, or such proportion of them as would be convenient to his circumstances, we in return undertaking to find him in food and shelter until such time as he has repaid the advance made. That obligation it would be the truest kindness to enforce with Rhadamantine severity. Until the man is out of debt he is not his own master. All that he can make over his actual rations and Shelter money should belong to his creditor. Of course such an arrangement might be varied indefinitely by private agreement; the repayment of instalments could be spread ever a longer or shorter time, but the mainstay of the whole principle would be the execution of a legal agreement by which the man makes over the whole product of his labour to the Bank until he has repaid, his debt.
Take another instance. A clerk who has been many years in a situation and has a large family, which he has brought up respectably and educated. He has every prospect of retiring in a few years upon a superannuating allowance, but is suddenly confronted by a claim often through no fault of his own, of a sum of fifty or a hundred pounds, which is quite beyond his means. He has been a careful saving man, who has never borrowed a penny in his life, and does not know where to turn in his emergency. If he can not raise this money he will be sold up, his family will be scattered, his situation and his prospective pension will be lost, and blank ruin will stare him in the face. Now, were he in receipt of an income of ten times the amount, he would probably have a banking account, and, in consequence, be able to secure an advance of all he needed from his banker. Why should he not be able to pledge his salary, or a portion of it, to an Institution which would enable him to pay off his debt, on terms that, while sufficiently remunerative to the bank, would not unduly embarrass him?
At present what does the poor wretch do? He consults his friends, who, it is quite possible, are as hard up as himself, or he applies to some loan agency, and as likely as not falls into the hands of sharpers, who indeed, let him have the money, but at interest altogether out of proportion to the risk which they run, and use the advantage which their position gives them to extort every penny he has. A great black book written within and without in letters of lamentation, mourning, and woe might be written on the dealings of these usurers with their victims in every land.
It is of little service denouncing these extortioners. They have always existed,