OSCAR I. (1799-1859), king of Sweden, a son of Bernadotte, endeavoured to bring the system of criminal law of his country into accordance with modern ideas.

With this object he wrote, on the punishment of criminals, a book published in German under the title of Ueber Strafe und Strafanstalten. [Dictionnaire de l'Économie Politique, Paris, 1864.]

OUNCE (COIN). The money of account of Morocco is the ounce.

45

OVER-PRODUCTION has been supposed to exist both with respect to consumable commodities and capital. But "the theory of general over-production is an absurdity" (J. S.

OUT-DOOR RELIEF. See POOR LAW. OUTLAW. If a person formally charged with an offence by an indictment is not in custody and cannot be found, he may be outlawed, i.e. put out of the protection of the law. The practical results are that he becomes incapable of taking the benefit of the law, and his property is forfeited to the crown. In England outlawry was abolished in civil cases by 42 & 43 Vict. c. 59, and has fallen into disuse in criminal cases, but in Scotland the absence of the prisoner on the day on which he is summoned to appear and stand his trial is always followed by sentence of outlawry. [Stephen's Commentaries, bk. vi. c. xv. As regards outlawry in Scotland, see Bell's Digest of the Law of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1890.] J. E. C. M.

OUVRARD, G. J. (1770-1846), a Napoleon in the field of finance, started his fortune in 1789 by anticipating the demand for paper that would follow the enactment of the freedom of the press. He further amassed great wealth by contracts for provisioning the French armies, and on one occasion we find him making a treaty with the king of Spain as though a

sovereign power. He quarrelled successively with the government of Napoleon and that of the Restoration, and was imprisoned at least four times. Neither Napoleon, however, nor the Restoration government could dispense with his help. He wrote in prison three volumes of memoirs, Mémoires de G. J. Ouvrard sur sa vie et ses diverses opérations financières, Paris, 1827, 8vo. He was a severe critic of Napoleon's system of leaving to the invaded country the finding food for his armies, and offered an elaborate plan of his own before the Russian campaign, In addition to these memoirs, he

the recommendation to increase unproductive consumption or to diminish saving.

There are, however, some phenomena which partially resemble the description which is given of over-production. For instance, in a commercial crisis, when there is a deficiency of ready money, there seems to be a plethora of goods; as J. S. Mill has pointed out (Essay 2, Some Unsettled Questions). A similar appearance, as he observed, may be produced by a derangement of currency; and it may be added by an appreciation of money consequent upon a great increase in production. Those who suffer from having to meet fixed charges with shrinking incomes are apt to complain of overproduction. In general, improvement in production, when accompanied with changes in the channels of trade" (Ricardo), causes loss to some classes of producers. Workmen may be displaced by machinery (RICARDO, Pol. Econ., ch. xxxi., MILL, Pol. Econ., Ì. ch. vi. § 2); the native workman by the foreigner (SIDGWICK, Pol. Econ., III. ch. v. § 4). These phenomena, if they occurred on a large scale, might present the appearance of general over-production.

"sudden

The impossibility of a "general glut" has been demonstrated by almost all the authoritative writers of last century; with particular clearness by J. MILL, J. B. SAY, and J. S. MILL. On the other side are the weighty names of MALTHUS, T. CHALMERS, and SISMONDI ; followed by a crowd of inferior writers. edification is no doubt to be derived from examining these writings, and in Mill's phrase (Essays, loc. cit.), "seeing that no scattered particles of important truth are buried and lost in the ruins of exploded error."

Some

[J. Mill, Elements, ch. iv. § iii. (1868); see also Commerce defended (1808).-J. B. Say, Traité (des débouchés, i. ch. xv.).—Revue encyclopédique, July 1824 (reply to Sismondi), correspondence with Malthus.-J. S. Mill, Essays on Unsettled Questions, Essay 2; and Pol. Econ., bk. iii. ch. xiv.-Ricardo, Pol. Econ., ch. xxi. See also Letters to Malthus, edited by J. Bonar ("how their consuming without reproducing can be beneficial to a country, in any possible state of it, I confess I cannot discover ").

J. R. M'Culloch, Pol. Econ., pt. i. ch. 7.Malthus, Pol. Econ., 1st ed. ch. vii., 2nd ed. bk.

ii., Definitions, p. 56.-See also Bonar's Malthus and his work, bk. ii., end of ch. ii. and ch. iii.Chalmers on Political Economy in connection with the Moral State, ch. v. et passim.-Sismondi, Nouveaux principes d'économie politique, 2nd ed. 1827, bk. iy. ch. iv., bk. vii. ch. vii. ; and, at the end, Éclaircissements, in which the first article (republished from the Annales de Législation, 1820) is a reply to an article in the Edinburgh Review by M'Culloch (1819, vol. 32, p. 470); the second article (republished from the Revue Encyclopédique for May 1824) gives a report of an oral discussion between Sismondi and Ricardo; the third is a rejoinder to J. B. Say's article in the Revue Encyclopédique for June 1824. Études sur l'économie politique, 1827, Essay 1, "Balance des consommations avec les productions."-Uriel H. Crocker, Excessive saving a cause of commercial distress; being a series of assaults upon accepted principles of Political Economy, 1884. The Cause of Hard Times, 1895.-J. A. Hobson, Contemp. Rev., March and May 1895.Robert Scott Moffat, The economy of Consumption: an omitted chapter in Political Economy.-A. F. Mummery and J. A. Hobson, The Physiology of Industry: being an exposure of certain Fallacies in existing Theories of Economics, 1889.]

F. Y. E.

OVERSEERS (OF THE POOR). A parochial office created in 1601 by the poor law of Elizabeth (43 Eliz. c. 2). Under that act the parish was made the area for poor relief, and the overseers of the poor were to act along with the church-wardens in the administration. They were to be from two to four in number, and to be appointed by the justices of the peace. Later acts gave power to appoint a single overseer in small places. Where there were no church-wardens the overseers acted by themselves. They were to be good and substantial householders. Women were eligible. If there was no inhabitant fit for the office, an inhabitant of a neighbouring parish might be appointed with his consent and at a salary. Vestries had power to elect a paid assistant overseer. So long as the administration of poor relief was parochial, the office of overseer was highly important. Since the passing of the new poor law of 1834 the overseers have little to do beyond levying the poor rate and making out the lists of persons liable to serve on juries or entitled to the parliamentary or municipal franchise. For the changes affecting overseers in rural parishes made by the Local Government Act 1894, see PARISH.

[See Report of Poor-Law Commission, 1834.Eden, History of the Poor Law.-Wright and Hobhouse, Local Government and Taxation.]

F. C. M.

OVERSTONE, LORD. See LOYD, S. J. OVERT-MARKET. See MARKET OVERT. OWEN, ROBERT (1771-1858), was born at Newton, Montgomeryshire. His father was saddler, ironmonger, and post-master. Between 1781 and 1790 he was assistant to an old

fashioned Stamford ex-pedlar and linen-draper, M'Guffog; then to Messrs. Flint and Palmer of Ludgate Hill, shopkeepers of the new school, who often worked their employees from 8 A.M. to 2 A.M. Next we find him in Manchester earning £40 a year, at Satterfield's; then setting up for himself without capital, without knowledge of machinery, with an equally inexperienced and indigent partner, in the business of making spinning mules. In 1790 he became manager to Drink water, one of the earliest cottonmill owners at Manchester, with £300 a year, a prospect of partnership, and 500 men under him. In this capacity, he was the first person to spin North American cotton on rollers (1791). In 1794 or 1795 he threw up Drinkwater's employment, and started the Chorlton cotton twist

factory. While on a commercial visit to Glasgow in connection with this business, he met Miss Dale, daughter of Dr. Dale, proprietor of New Lanark. She told him that New Lanark was for sale; he went to her father, and bought it at £60,000 for himself and his partners (1797). In the same year he married Miss Dale. It was not until 1st January 1800 that he "entered on the government" (that was his phrase) of New Lanark. The description of New Lanark during Mr. Dale's régime (1784-1800) is derived from Robert Owen's autobiography (1857), his New View of Society (bk. i. ii., 1813), and Dr. Macnab, who, in 1819, examined and confirmed Robert Owen's statements in his report to the Duke of Kent. description was subjected to the most searching criticism at the time by streams of visitors, including the future Emperor Nicholas, Lord Stowell, and others; and was never doubted until Mr. Packard, in 1866, published in his life of Owen an anonymous letter saying that, in 1796, the children were never overworked, that there was no crime and no punishment.

This

Robert Owen's and Macnab's accounts are as follows:-In 1784, Dale set up one spinningmill near the Falls of the Clyde. In 1786 work began. He could not get any one to come and work; so he imported 500 workhouse or charity children, whom he fed, clothed, and educated. He took them at six or seven years of age, and worked them from 6 A.M. to 7 P.M.; so that education (say for half-an-hour), began after 7 P.M. Many children, after seven or eight years of apprenticeship, ran away. Further, he got some grown-up people together and built a village of one-roomed cottages with dunghills in front of each (see Rob. Owen, by a Former Teacher, 1839). These grown-up people turned out to be thieves, drunkards, and criminals of every sort, as respectable people would not take to manufacture. In 1797 there were four mills at work, and about 700 children and 1000 adults employed; and Mr. Dale, who presided over a bank at Glasgow, over forty

chapels, and over cotton-manufactures all over Scotland, used to spend a few hours every three months, but no more, in New Lanark.

The plan upon which Owen worked was twofold:

First, as to the children. He took no more children from workhouses, and allowed no child under ten to work. He established a normal working-day for children, and adults, of ten-anda-half hours exclusive, twelve hours inclusive of meals (Macnab, 111). His method of education was borrowed from Bell, whose pamphlet on education was published in 1797, and Lancaster, whose schools were started in 1798, each of whom he had assisted with £500 and £1000 respectively. But he borrowed their method with improvements. Both Lancaster and Bell tried, like Owen, to make instruction mutual and recreative. Owen went further, and abolished rewards and punishments, and his teachers taught their pupils by precept and example "to make one another happy.' All taught from objects and observation. Owen, however, although he kept at his own expense a elergyman on the establishment, and allowed Bible reading and Sunday schools, excluded theological instruction from the compulsory curriculum. Drill was instituted for boys, domestic economy for girls, singing and dancing for boys and girls. Further, he extended instruction to infants of two years, then at their mothers' request to infants of one year of age this project (1809) was only completed in 1816; and these, the first infant schools in the united kingdom, were the models of the first English infant schools set up by Lord Brougham and others in 1819 (Hansard, third series, vol. xxvii. p. 1309; New Moral World, vol. i. p. 11). Owen believed they were the first in Europe. But Oberlin started schools for infants of two or three years old at Ban de la Roche, apparently at the end of the 18th century (Memoirs of Oberlin, p. 87). Owen continued education up till twelve years of age. The expense of education was 3s. per annum per child, paid by the parents, and £700 per annum paid by the employer (R. D. Owen's Education at New Lanark, 1824).

Secondly, Owen declared that healthy surroundings were as necessary to the character of adults as to the character of children. He wrote: "In pity to suffering humanity either keep the poor in the state of the most abject ignorance, or at once determine to form them into rational beings, into useful and effective members of the state." Institutions must be adapted to perfect the manufacturing community as a whole, not merely the immature portion of it. First, in order to extirpate theft, he put before each worker "a silent monitor a small patch of coloured wood symbolising the black, shady, or white character of the worker; e.g. if black, it meant that the worker

47

had committed theft which Owen by some system of his own had discovered. A register of character was kept. Then, night watchmen paraded the streets to take down the names of drunkards; three bad cases of drunkenness incurring dismissal (R. D. Owen). Drink-shops were gradually abolished, and in 1819 had long been extinct. Again, an elected committee, nicknamed by the housewives "bug-hunters," inspected domestic cleanliness once a week. Then illicit intercourse was fined; fines being paid to "the support fund," and not more than twenty-eight illegitimate children were born there in nine years (Macnab's Report, p. 110). The support fund for sick and old, and those injured by accident, was subscribed to by all the workmen, who had to set apart th of their wages although their wages were considered by the Leeds committee of 1819 low, 9s. 11d. a week for men, 6s. a week for women. Voluntary thrift was also encouraged in two ways special residences were set apart for those who laid by money; and a savings bank started, which in August 1819 had £3193 deposits, the population being 2481 in number. There was also a common store. Owen bought wholesale and resold at moderate profits to his work people, thereby underselling the former shopmen by 20 or 25 per cent, and substituting good for bad goods. This method killed the dram-shops and every other shop in the place. Further, in 1812 (see Statement) he projected a common kitchen "in order to save his men some £4000 a year" wasted on separate fires, cooking, etc. The kitchen dropped out of sight, and was not quite ready on 26th March 1819 (see Dr. Griscom's Travels, ii. 384). The effect of these arrangements was that none of the workmen were convicted of crime between 1803 (Hansard, 41, 1203) or 1804 (Macnab) and 1819. Nor according to the Former Teacher did Owen dismiss wrong-doers or opponents. R. D. OWEN's statement as to drunkards being dismissed indicates an exception to this rule.

But these arrangements could not be carried out except in a building which should focus and be set apart for the common needs of everyday life. The projection of this "New Institute for the Formation of Character" in 1809 had frightened his old partners away, and created such hostility in his new partners that in 1813 Owen went to London to find new partners, published the first two essays of his New View of Society (all four essays were at first sent to every government, religious minister, etc., in 1814, and were only issued to the general public in 1816), became acquainted with the leading men of the day, and finally returned to buy in New Lanark, at a cost of £114,000, for himself, BENTHAM, Walker, J. Foster, W. Allen, J. Fox, and Michael Gibbs. The name of the institute embodied what Hazlitt called Owen's "fixed idea"-the idea which first struck him when

48

on his Highland tour in 1802-that "circumstances form character. Buying cheap and selling dear, are "circumstances" which deteriorate character; they must be counteracted by some "circumstance" which brings peace, unity, and intelligence. Ties between master and man were loosened by factory labour; some new bond must be forged. The factory system was necessary, because "it is the interest of society to ensure the creation of riches with the maximum of comfort to the producer' (Address to Powers at Aachen, 1818), and because it was too late to go back; but it had evils, and one evil was that labour was 66 depreciated by excessive competition between labourer and labourer, and, as he afterwards wrote, machinery and labourers; this evil must be met by tackling the question "how the excess of riches may be generally distributed throughout society advantageously for it" (ib.); and by pushing forward institutions able to raise and reunite those whom the new productive mechanism had sundered and coarsened. Hence the institute with its lectures, dances, libraries, and other instruments of rational recreation. It was the complement of the factory, and answered the character-wants which factories created. Owen advocated an ideal-a word which by the way he does not use-but an ideal in which profit is an ingredient. Griscom found the partners drawing 12 per cent profit in 1819. Owen preached philanthropy, but not that of the Duc de LA ROCHEFOUCAULD, whom he saw in France making cotton 4 per cent dearer than his own; philanthropy and a minimum of 5 per cent was to him the Law and the Prophets. This was the double bait which hooked Bentham and the Quakers, Walker, Allen, and Foster. Owen's ideal was imposed on the employees from without, and did not grow from within. But it won its way with them by persuasion, not coercion. The Teacher's stories of Owen's forgiveness and tolerance are conclusive on this point. Again, in 1806, when cotton imports were stopped, he paid his unemployed employees full wages, and wished to go under if they went under. As it was he only lost £7000. he always foresaw that a patriarchal system of industrial government must lead to industrial self-government, and that his measures introduced "a more just equality of our race," and therefore, he said, the Duke of Kent stuck to him till the last, and men like Lord LAUDERDALE fell away from him. In spite of this, he never took any step to substitute the delegates for the patron at New Lanark. But then, he would have answered, "New Lanark is but a half-way house, a compromise, a second best." He had other schemes brewing. The following

Again,

are two notices of the condition of New Lanark after 1828, when the opposition of his Quaker partners to his religious views forced him to retire from the firm; (1) from the Glasgow Free

Press cited in the Crisis, iii. 29, which alleged that the "ornamental parts" of educa tion had been dropped, but that dancing and singing were still taught (1833). (2) From R. Owen's "Address to Infant School Societies" in 1830, which praised the school for its elder children, but alleged that the rational infant school was no more. New Lanark seemed to be forgotten, except as a school for children.

R. Owen's further schemes may be considered under two heads:

(1) First came the tentative state SOCIALISM defined by the New View. Abolish state LOTTERIES; allow licenses to sell drink to fall in without being renewed; set up national education under a department which will soon be of primary importance in the state, because that state is best governed whose members are best educated. Collect labour statistics, including the price of labour and the number of the unemployed, and keep some useful work on hand (e.g. on roads and canals), as a reserve for the unemployed; who if employed on these works should receive less than the market rate of wages. He was the earliest advocate, in January 1815, of the original Factory Bill, introduced by the first Sir R. Peel later on in that year. His pamphlet on the bill (1815) claims the entire credit of it. Both pamphlet and bill advocate the New Lanark day of ten-anda-half hours exclusive, twelve hours inclusive, work, and the prohibition of children-workers under ten. The bill, not the pamphlet, limits the normal working day to young persons under eighteen, the pamphlet adding that this would practically involve all the workers in its scope; the pamphlet, not the bill, prescribes an educational test as the condition precedent of child-work, also half-time for children between ten and twelve years of age, in order that they might continue their education at their employers' expense. Owen travelled all over England to collect evidence against the white slavery, as he called it, and attended nearly every meeting of the committee which sat, as he says, for two years to inquire whether it was unhealthy for children of six and upwards to work fourteen or fifteen hours a day in stifling rooms. The subsequent limitation of the act (1819) to textile industries attests the opposition which the bill evoked, and the crucial character of Owen's evidence. The bill was brandmarked "New Lanark," and the Lanark workmen described it as a measure to extend their privileges to their fellowworkers (see their address to Owen, 7th May 1818); but whether Owen drew the bill and gave it to Sir R. Peel, as he asserts, may be doubted.

(2) But secondly, the views in the New View were described as a first dose, which should prepare for a second and stronger dose. This last was contained in his report to Archbishop Sutton's Committee on Distress, which sat in the London Tavern during 1816, and was referred by and published 1817. It recommends "villages them to Sturges Bourne's poor-law committee, of union and mutual co-operation," mainly agricultural but partly manufacturing, and containing (say) 1200 people. The odd plan of a parallelogram within which the villagers were to live