hearts, who give their best without grudge or stint to their poorer brethren.  There are rich men who have retired from the haunts of the wealthy, and voluntarily chosen to place their homes among the poor.  There are men who work all day at business, and in the evening devote themselves to the care of working boys; there are women, under no vows, who read in hospitals, preside at cheap dinners, take care of girls’ clubs, collect rents, and in a thousand ways bring light and kindness into dark places.  The clergy of the Established Church, who may be regarded as almoners and missionaries of civilization rather than of religion, seeing how few of the poor attend their services, can generally command voluntary help when they ask for it.  Voluntary work in generous enterprise is no longer, happily, so rare that men regard it with surprise; yet it belongs essentially to this century, and almost to this generation.  Since the Reformation the work of English charity presents three distinct aspects.  First came the foundation of almshouses and the endowment of doles.  Nothing, surely, can be more delightful than to found an almshouse, and to consider that for generations to come there will be a haven of rest provided for so many old people past their work.  The soul of King James’s confectioner—­good Balthazar Sanchez—­must, we feel sure, still contemplate his cottages at Tottenham with complacency; one hopes His Majesty was not overcharged in the matter of pasties and comfits in order to find the endowment for those cottages.  Even the dole of a few loaves every Sunday to as many aged poor has its attraction, though necessarily falling far short of the solid satisfaction to be derived from the foundation of an almshouse.  But the period of almshouses passed away, and that of Societies succeeded.  For a hundred years the well-to-do of this country have been greatly liberal for every kind of philanthropic effort.  But they have conducted their charity as they have conducted their business, by drawing cheques.  The clergy, the secretaries, and the committees have done the active work, administering the funds subscribed by the rich man’s cheques.  The system of cheque-charity has its merits as well as its defects, because the help given does generally reach the people for whom it was intended.  Compared, however, with the real thing, which is essentially personal, it may be likened unto the good old method—­which gave the rich man so glorious an advantage—­of getting into heaven by paying for masses.  Its principal defect is that it keeps apart the rich and poor, creates and widens the breach between classes, causing those who have the money to consider that it is theirs by Divine right, and those who have it not to forget that the origin of wealth is thrift and patience and energy, and that the way to wealth is always open for all who dare to enter and to practise these virtues.