PUBLIC CHARITY AND PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY 593
whom the duty of such examination and the administration of charities could be entrusted, by a system of honor offices, this fact is to be attributed to certain peculiar characteristics of the life of the German community.
The principle of self-government has, it is true, been more fully worked out in England and, especially, in America. But there it is far more connected with politics and with private enterprise, so that in the matter of administration of the charities, requiring as it does an unusual amount of independence and impartiality, the advisability of a system of honor offices seemed very questionable. For this very reason, however, private philanthropy was developed to such an extent that (particularly in America) the state and the community are relieved of a great many burdens which in Germany they have to bear. And that is why England has been able to employ the workhouse system much more freely and unhesitatingly ; for outdoor relief, especially the care of widows and orphans, is exercised quite generally by private individuals, while in Germany this rests to a greater extent on the community. But and here we return to our starting point this by no means alters the nature of the problems or the principles recognized as fundamental and essen- tial for their solution. In the English Reform Act of 1834 there was recognized as fully as at Elberfeld the fact that above all things a thorough examination of each individual case was nec- essary ; the only difference lies in the fact that they (the Eng- lish), on account of the abuses of outdoor relief, felt justified in putting it down as a general principle that the best means of testing the individual case was the workhouse ; for they argued that those who were really in need would gladly accept its help, while an impostor would shrink from the inconveniences and >nal limitations enjoined by the life in such an institution. The truth of this claim has now been so fully demonstrated that, even in Germany, all those versed in the subject desire to give the workhouse principle a trial, so far as such a test of each case is at all necessary. The test is not needed where every suspicion of deception or of fear of work is precluded, as, for
