1. In regard to the individuals, it is supposed that the banks will make them save more eagerly. If this enables them to make a greater provision for the seasons of distress, it is good ; if not, all that they would have spent in innocent enjoymeats•s so much good lost.
But it may well be questioned whether banks are calculated to make them save more rigidly. The idea of a stock which they may leave behind them is something. But the idea of a better provision for the occasions of their own distress is something also; and with the greatest number, it is probable, the greatest something of the two.
With regard .to the convenience of taking the money in small sums, the monthly payments of two shillings, are nearly as small as can be desired. If this is too small for the rate of any man's abilities, there might in each society be different rates, or one man might belong to several societies. • A circumstance which has been urged more strongly is, the inconvenience of paying, as required in Benefit Clubs, on a particular day ; to banks the payment is wade whenever it is convenient. This has its advantages, and its disadvantages. The dis advantages appear to exceed the advantages. With this opinion Mr Duncan was so deeply impressed, that he thinks stated payments, with penalties, a pro per law for Frugality Banks. " Though it may bear he says, " on a contributor to be bound to pay annually a stated sum, as in Friendly Societies, under the pain of forfeiting the whole, it is, notwith standing, useful in such institutious, that some strong motive should exist for regular payments. The rea son on which this opinion is founded, must be ob vious to all who know any thing of human nature. What we have no pressing motive to do at a parti cular time, we are apt to delay till it is beyonslour power to do at all. So sensible are the common people themselves of this tendency, that we frequent ly observe them having recourse to contrivances for forcing themselves to save money for a particular object. It is partly on this principle that Friendly Societies find so many supporters ; and that there Are such frequent associations among the lower classes, with the view of raising funds, for the pur chase of family Bibles, or some of the more ex pensive articles of furniture." (Essay on Parish Banks, p. 24.) This important fact, of the voluntary associations of the people to raise funds, not merely for support in seasons of distress, but for the purchase of articles of fancy and luxury, is a strong argument in favour of Clubs. It shows two things ; it shows the plea
. sure the people take in them ; • and it gives the ex perience of the efficacy which attends them.
The difficulty of making good the stated payments • Lathe club, at moments of great pressure, as when • employment is-wanting, or a man's wife and children are •sick,•is, objected to Benefit Societies. This is 'an inconveniencef no .doubt; but we have seen that it is not unattended .with compensation. In fact, a man must be in a Mate of distress very uncommon, if tbe,isprevested by seal necessity from paying his LI club-money. Besides, this is one of the occasions on which very extraordinary exertions are made by his acquaintance and friends ; especially if he is not a man thoroughly worthless, whose vices, not his misfortunes, are the cause of his distress, to supply him with the means. And this is an exercise of vir tue in these acquaintances and friends, which is highly useful ; and tends forcibly to the increase of the benevolent feelings in the minds both of those who make it, and of those in favoar of whom it is -made. • It is urged as a hardship of great magnitude, that a man, after he has been a long time a contributor to a -club, should lose the benefit of the whole, for a de lay in payment at a season of peculiar distress. But a certain degree of indulgence is allowed ; a default er does not forfeit till the first meeting, which is a month after the quarter-day. Besides, it is very common to misrepresent the amount of the loss in this case. What a man really and truly loses is that which will be necessary to place him in the same si tuation. But that is only as much as will be neces sary to entitle him to the allowances of another club. This may be nine or twelve months' contributions. Suppose the rate of contribution is 2s. a-month, and 5s. of entry-money. What a man loses by expulsion, however much he may have paid, is only 29s. If, indeed, he is an old man, past the age of admission into another club, what he loses is much more serious; it is the value of all the benefit which he would have been entitled to derive. And, in this case, some modification of the rule of forfeiture would be desirable. It is, however, no fundamental objection, because such a modification may be easi ly made. Lastly, the number of those who suffer forfeiture from real necessity, and not from their vices, is small, bearing a very insignificant propor tion to the whole. For a hardship to the very small number, a great benefit to the very great number is not to be foregone. This is the very principle on which bad government is distinguished from •good.