The following diagram will explain this classification:
_____________________________________________________________________ | | | |Population| |Area of|No. of | | COUNTY. | UNION. |No. of| of |Popula-|Union, |Relieving| | | |Par- |Parishes |tion of|Statute|Officers.| | | |ishes |__________|Union |Acres. | | | | | |High |Low | | | | |______________|__________|______|_____|____|_______|_______|_________| |FIRST CLASS, | | | | | | | | |Denbigh, |Ruthin, | 21 | 2066| 97| 16,019|166,619| 2 | |Durham, |Easington,| 19 | 2976| 10| 6,984| 34,660| 1 | |Staffordshire,|Uttoxeter,| 16 | 4864| 116| 12,837| 56,685| 1 | |Derbyshire, |Shardlow, | 46 | 3182| 23| 29,812| 66,974| 2 | |Lincoln |Louth | 88 | 6927| 24| 25,214|152,251| 3 | |______________|__________|______|_____|____|_______|_______|_________| |SECOND CLASS, | | | | | | | | |Middlesex |City of | | | | | | | | | London | 98 | 4014| 72| 57,100| 370| 3 | |______________|__________|______|_____|____|_______|_______|_________| |THIRD CLASS, |Parish. | | | | | | | |Middlesex |Marylebone| 1 |.....|....|138,164| 1490| ... | |______________|__________|______|_____|____|_______|_______|_________|
These divisions of territory may be regarded from different points of view. They may be seen through the media of statute-books, reports, returns, and statistics; or they may be actually surveyed. Each course has its peculiar dangers. The mind, occupied with matters of detail and routine occurrences, is apt to lose in comprehensiveness as much as it gains in minute exactness. To avoid this danger the mind must soar as the facts accumulate. It must regard them, sometimes from the height of one theory, and sometimes from the height of another. For the mind becomes tinged with the hue of whatever is frequently presented to it. Opinions even are hereditary. And every set of facts leads to a different conclusion, according to the texture of the minds they pass through. Refer to the facts connected with the condition of the poor, which have been proclaimed during the last few years; and then reflect to what contradictory opinions they have led. The man of strong benevolent feelings deduces one inference. The politico-economical theorist deduces another. And the man of practice and experience is as likely to be deluded as either. He sees destitution so frequently connected with imprudence, laziness, and crime, that he is apt to believe that the union is indissoluble. His mind has never embraced a general idea, or traced effects to causes, or distinguished them, the one from the other. And in this matter, where the causes and effects are so complicated, and entangled by their mutual reaction, he is likely to be at fault. Then the man of pure benevolence sees only the pain, and demands only the means of immediate relief. And the political economist tells us, "That the law which would enforce charity can fix no limits, either to the ever-increasing wants of a poverty which itself has created, or to the insatiable desires and demands of a population which itself hath corrupted and led astray."