It appears from that return, that the inhabitants of that part of the Canton, which is subject to the laws which we are going to describe, consisted, in 1831, of 321,468 persons, divided into three classes, heimathloses, aubains, and bourgeois. The first class, which appears to be so small as to be inconsiderable, consist of foreign refugees or their descendants. The second comprises all those who have not a right to bourgeoisie in any commune: their number amounted, in 1780, to 3482 persons. It is said to have subsequently increased, but it is not probable that it has more than doubled; and we believe that 10,000 persons, or less than 1-32nd part of the whole population, exceeds the whole number of those who are not entitled to bourgeoisie; but it is to be observed that the word “aubain,” though strictly meaning a person who has no settlement in the Canton, is also applied to persons who, though bourgeois, are not entitled to bourgeoisie in the commune in which they reside. The support of the heimathloses and of the aubains, properly so called, that is, of those who have no right whatever to bourgeoisie, falls on the government. The third class is composed of the descendants of those who, in the sixteenth century, were held entitled to the public property of each commune, and those who by themselves or their ancestors have purchased bourgeoisie in any commune. Bourgeoisie appears to be personal and hereditary. It is not gained by residence, or lost by absence; and may therefore, in fact, belong to persons having little other connexion with the commune. At a period, of which the precise date is not stated, but which appears to belong to the seventeenth century, it became the law that every one was entitled to support from the commune of which he was bourgeois, and that the sums necessary were to be supplied from the public property of the commune; and so far as that was insufficient, from landed property, to whomsoever belonging, situated in the commune, and from the personal property of the bourgeois whether resident or not. To this hereditary bourgeoisie the raising and administration of the poor-fund was and still is confided; and apparently with most unfortunate results. The following is the conclusion of the official answer of the government of Berne to the questions proposed by Mr. Morier (p. 207):-- _What are the abuses complained of?_ _Do they arise from the principle of the law, or from the character and social position of its administrators?_ _What remedies have been applied?_ _What have been their results?_