For the encouragement of such as shall become benefactors to the foregoing “good design,” it is enacted that a donor of fifty pounds and upwards shall be eligible for the office of governor and guardian; and power is also given for granting licences for the keeping of hackney coaches not exceeding 150 in number, and for sedan-chairs not exceeding 80 in number, to ply for hire within the city and liberties, every licence so granted being charged with the sum of 5_l._, to be paid to the governors and guardians of the poor by way of fine, and forty shillings annually afterwards, so long as the said licence shall be continued. It is further enacted for the support of the poor in the said workhouse, that a rate of 3_d._ in the pound be charged on every house within the city and liberties, to be levied in the same way as ministers’ money; but in case any surplus should remain after defraying the necessary charges of the workhouse, and the poor maintained and employed therein, a proportional abatement is to be made in this tax upon houses. The above is the substance of this important Act, important, that is, as being the first in which a direct provision is made for the relief of poverty in Ireland. The Act is local, it is true, its operation being limited to the city and liberties of Dublin; but it recognises the principle of taxing the public for the prevention of vagrancy and begging, conjointly with the alternative of relieving the destitute—a principle universal in itself, and susceptible of universal application. The endeavour to effect these objects through the agency of workhouses, was very generally resorted to in England about this time. They had been recommended by Sir Matthew Hale, and also by Mr. Locke in his Report on the state of the poor, and the Bristol, Worcester, and other workhouses were established with a like intent,[17] although the employment of the inmates with a view to profit, was no doubt at the same time regarded as a collateral advantage. The direction that the poor children “found or taken up” should be apprenticed to “honest persons being protestants,” seems, as in the case of the free schools already noticed,[18] to indicate a desire in the framers of the measure to make it subservient to the spread of the reformed religion; but at that time the property, and nearly all the industrious occupations of the country were in the hands of protestants, so that with them alone was there likely to be an eligible opportunity for apprenticing out the children. The direction to do so was therefore superfluous, but it indicates the dominant feeling of the time. The corporation was reconstituted and its powers extended by _the 1st George 2nd, cap. 27_, in 1728, and ultimately the workhouse became merged in the Dublin Foundling Hospital; but as it will hereafter be necessary to revert to this point we need not dwell on it at present. ----- [17] See ‘History of the English Poor Law,’ vol. i. pp. 302, 372, 373 and 385. [18]