to the chief aim of the Society, the sanctification of its members by the visitation of the poor in their homes.

There is thus established between the members and the poor a very close and confidential relationship which is held sacred by the Society, and is a bar to any disclosure such as the Association above referred to would necessitate. At the same time, it prevents the Society from degenerating into a mere relief Board.

This, however, does not dispense the Society from the duty of investigation, and from seeing that the families relieved by its members are not allowed to lose their independence and self-respect by becoming dependent on the bread of charity. For this purpose the Society has many activities, well known to the members, and which, re-acting on each other, provide, so far as possible, the antidote to the giving of indiscriminate charity.

One of the latest and most successful of these special works is the City Labour Yard in Vicar Street, which is controlled by a very active and business-like committee of members of the Society. Its object is to provide work for two classes of the unemployed. Firstly, the old or maimed, who find it difficult to procure regular employment; secondly, the temporarily unemployed, who are anxious to earn even a small wage while waiting for work.

Incidentally, it serves as a test of the bona fides of a man who says he is willing to work, but that there is no work for him. The offer of a ticket for the Labour Yard generally reveals the "work-shy work-shy" and slacker," and thereby makes the work of the Society's visitors much easier. Apart from the "work-shy" class, there is a large class of old or maimed men who are admirably fitted for such work as the Labour Yard provides, and who can become sufficiently expert to earn a living wage.

It

Prior to July, 1915, the City Labour Yard was run by a committee, of which Miss Harrison was Secretary. did very valuable work, but it was run at a heavy loss, notwithstanding that the maximum wage to be earned by piece-work was only 2/6 per day.

Although the Labour Yard was taken over in July, 1915, from the old Committee, it was not until October

of that year that the Society's committee was appointed and the work re-organised. It was essential that the committee should contain men of the best business experience in the city, and fortunately the Society has always been able to command the service of such men. The system of working adopted was that of a general committee, which meets once a month, and three sub-committees, which meet at much more frequent intervals. The first sub-committee deals with the purchase of timber and with its manufacture into firewood; the second deals. Iwith the sales and accounts; the third with the moral improvement of the Catholic men, including the visitation of their families. There is a paid manager and office clerk. The first thing necessary was to make the sheds waterproof, and to provide cover for the timber, so that it might be kept dry. The funds for the necessary capital outlay were provided by grants from the Council of Dublin of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, by a loan (which is still outstanding), and by public subscriptions. A motor and saw were purchased, and a horse and lorry. Now there are two saws going and five horses always on the road. All men who were fit for such work were put on piecework, and there was no limit put on the amount which could be earned by a piece-worker. The result was a

steady increase in the wage earned. The common idea which prevailed amongst the outside public as to the wages paid in Labour Yards was that the workers received only 1/- per day, the fact being that 1/- per day is the minimum, and is scarcely ever paid except to a casual who comes with a ticket and never returns. Of the forty men employed during the winter of 1916-17, some have earned from 4/- to 5/- per day, and only two received the minimum. The average wage paid was 2/4, although 75 per cent. of the men employed were disabled in some way.

This being so, the question arises-Is the Labour Yard paying these wages out of the charitable funds subscribed, and is thus guilty of an economic heresy? This is not so, and a glance at the books will prove it. The first thing necessary is to see that your stock account is correct. This can be checked from day to day by a simple scheme

which shows the stock of timber manufactured and unmanufactured from the day before, the total purchase for the day in question, the total manufactured that day, and the total sold. Knowing your fixed charges, and the wholesale price for the manufactured firelighters, logs, etc., you can tell whether the day's work has resulted in a profit or loss at the price per piece and daily wage paid.

As was to be expected, the earlier months showed the heaviest loss. The reason was that the running expenses were more or less fixed, and there was not sufficient material or machinery to raise the gross output to a paying level. When this was remedied, the loss began to decrease steadily, until it practically disappeared. The accounts just audited for the trading from July, 1915, to December 31st, 1916, show a loss of only £20 16s. 11d. on a trading of £2.631 3s. 2d. The items of the balance sheet are interesting. The cost of timber, resin, oil, rope-twine and sacks was £772 17s. 1d.; wages paid, £1,332 11s. 4d.; salaries and commission only £155 10s. Od. The balance of the £2,631 3s. 2d. was made up of sundry items for tools, repairs, light, forage, etc.

Should the same rate of improvement continue, the Committee will be able to improve the rate of remuneration and extend the work into other lines.

Another important feature in this work is the length of time the men remain in the Yard. Of the 40 men who work there, 4 were taken over with the yard, 18 are there over a year, 11 over six months, 5 over three months, and 2 over one month. The men who remain longest are usually the disabled men, who are unable to find other regular employment, and those men have now become so expert at the work that they earn a much higher wage than they could hope to earn outside. Some of them, indeed, have been so improved, as a result of the training, that they have secured work at remunerative rates elsewhere. The importance of this aspect of the question cannot be exaggerated. All the reports which have been published on the question of men disabled in the war lay great stress on the necessity of fitting such men for work in order to prevent their life of enforced idleness from

being a burden to them. Schemes are already in operation on the Continent and in the Colonies, the basis of which is the re-education of the disabled men, so as to fit them for active life. A well-organised labour yard, with various branches of work, will prove invaluable in affording a school for the training of such men, and a means of regular employment for such as cannot work on their own account.

At present a labour yard is looked upon as the last resort of the "down-and-out," and has, in consequence, been avoided by the labourers out of employment. The writer has often been told by labouring men that they felt ashamed to go to it and to associate with the derelict class who usually worked there. The past history of Labour Yards is responsible for this feeling, because there was too much of the element of charity about it, and the men felt that they were almost on the level of paupers. The City Labour Yard is steadily removing these ideas by putting its work more and more on a business-like basis, and is thus really making a genuine experiment in practical Socialism. The aim of the Committee is to pay a living wage which may compare with the average wage payable in similar employment in the open market, regard, of course, being had to the physical condition of the men employed. This happy condition they expect to attain by increasing their output and by opening up other classes of work within the power of partially disabled men, e.g., making egg-boxes, collecting and sorting of waste paper, and, gradually, the more expert work of making wooden toys, etc.

As a beginning for this very practical programme, one might suggest a change of name, so that the old pauperising ideas associated with the name "Labour Yard " might be laid to rest, and the new scheme launched under a new name as well as under new hopes.

PRE-CELTIC IRELAND.

BY PROF. R. A. S. MACALISTER, LITT.D., F.S.A.
Continued.

64

CHAPTER I

A Sketch of the History of Irish Archaeology

I. Archaeology in early Irish Literature. II. "Book antiquaries" and Field Antiquaries." III. Sir James Ware. IV. Edward Lhuyd. V. Sir Thomas Molyneux. VI. Charles Vallancey. VII. Edward Ledwich. VIII. Sir William Betham. IX. George Petrie. X. The Ordnance Survey. XI. John O'Donovan. XII. Eugene O'Curry. XIII. The Royal Irish Academy Museum. XIV. Sir William Wilde. XV. Other workers. XVI. The Importance of Irish Antiquities.

I. An interest in the past is a natural instinct of humanity. There is no tribe, however low in the social scale, that has not asked questions about how the world has come to be, with the living things that people it; and that has not found answers which, if artless and unscientific, at least satisfy the craving for knowledge. Of this natural interest in the past, Ireland affords a conspicuous example. The two professions, the bardic and the druidic, were endowed with many privileges, in virtue of their members being the repositories of the tribal traditions—in the one case on the historical side, in the other on the religious.

But, although the early Irish writers thus display a deep interest in History, the conception of a science of Archaeology does not seem to have entered their heads. The ancient monuments of Ireland, which are still conspicuous, must in the nature of things have been yet more conspicuous in the middle ages; but we find few definite references to them in mediaeval Irish literature.* Not

*This is not meant to imply that the Irish literature is not of any service to the archaeologist: quite the contrary-a study of Irish literature is absolutely essential for a proper comprehension of Irish antiquities, and vice versa. The two complement and illumine each other at every step. But the references in Irish literature throw light on antiquities rather by incidental mention or allusion than by direct description. Thus, we have speculations on Ogham writing, without a single reference to any existing Ogham monument, which might have corroborated or refuted those speculations. But, on the other hand, we have many indirect allusions to Ogham writing which, properly interpreted, are of the greatest value.