A man is not poor because he has nothing, but
because he does not work. The man who without any degree of wealth has
an employment is as much at his ease as he who without labour has an
income of a hundred crowns a year. He who has no substance, and yet has
a trade, is not poorer than he who, possessing ten acres of land, is
obliged to cultivate it for his subsistence. The mechanic who gives his
art as an inheritance to his children has left them a fortune, which is
multiplied in proportion to their number. It is not so with him who,
having ten acres of land, divides it among his children.
In trading countries, where many men have no other subsistence but
from the arts, the state is frequently obliged to supply the necessities
of the aged, the sick, and the orphan. A well-regulated government draws
this support from the arts themselves. It gives to some such employment
as they are capable of performing; others are taught to work, and this
teaching of itself becomes an employment.
The alms given to a naked man in the street do not fulfil the
obligations of the state, which owes to every citizen a certain
subsistence, a proper nourishment, convenient clothing, and a kind of
life not incompatible with health.
Aurungzebe, being asked why he did not build hospitals, said, "I
will make my empire so rich that there shall be no need of
hospitals."
[118]
He ought to have said, "I will begin by rendering my
empire rich, and then I will build hospitals."
The riches of the state suppose great industry. Amidst the numerous
branches of trade it is impossible but that some must suffer, and
consequently the mechanics must be in a momentary necessity.
Whenever this happens, the state is obliged to lend them a ready
assistance, whether it be to prevent the sufferings of the people, or to
avoid a rebellion. In this case hospitals, or some equivalent
regulations, are necessary to prevent this misery.
But when the nation is poor, private poverty springs from the
general calamity, and is, if I may so express myself, the general
calamity itself. All the hospitals in the world cannot cure this private
poverty; on the contrary, the spirit of indolence, which it constantly
inspires, increases the general, and consequently the private, misery.
Henry VIII,
[119]
resolving to reform the Church of England, ruined
the monks, of themselves a lazy set of people, that encouraged laziness
in others, because, as they practised hospitality, an infinite number of
idle persons, gentlemen and citizens, spent their lives in running from
convent to convent. He demolished even the hospitals, in which the lower
people found subsistence, as the gentlemen did theirs in the
monasteries. Since these changes, the spirit of trade and industry has
been established in England.
At Rome, the hospitals place every one at his ease except those who
labour, except those who are industrious, except those who have land,
except those who are engaged in trade. I have observed that wealthy
nations have need of hospitals, because fortune subjects them to a
thousand accidents; but it is plain that transient assistances are much
better than perpetual foundations. The evil is momentary; it is
necessary, therefore, that the succour should be of the same nature, and
that it be applied to particular accidents.
