PUBLIC RELIEF OF THE POOR 
 
 SIX LECTURES 
 
PUBLIC RELIEF 
 OF THE POOR 
 
 SIX LECTURES 
 
 BY THOMAS MACKAY 
 
 I 
 
 AUTHOR OF "THE ENGLISH POOR," ETC. 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 . 
 
 LONDON 
 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W. 
 1901 
 

 
PREFACE 
 
 THE following pages are the substance of six 
 lectures delivered at the Church House, West- 
 minster, at the invitation of the "Joint Lectures 
 Committee," during the winter 1900-1901. 
 Although much has been written about the 
 relief of the poor, no work, as far as the 
 author is aware, covers the precise ground 
 traversed in this volume. The treatment of 
 the subject is theoretical rather than practical. 
 If the author is right in his conviction that 
 pauperism and dependence among the poorer 
 classes are largely artificial and unnecessary 
 conditions, certain practical conclusions naturally 
 follow, but there is really no difficulty in adopting 
 the policy indicated. What is wanting to secure 
 the great reformation which lies within reach, 
 is a reasoned conviction of the possibility of 
 dispauperisation. The object of these lectures 
 was to present the arguments which seemed 
 to establish this proposition, and to leave its 
 
vi PREFACE 
 
 practical application to the common sense of 
 those who are responsible for the administration 
 of public relief. 
 
 A strong conviction of the justice of certain 
 views naturally leads to a belief that a fair 
 hearing will secure their general acceptance, 
 and it is hoped that these pages may do 
 something to overcome the indifference and 
 prejudice of public opinion, which regards 
 the whole question as incapable of amendment. 
 In this sense, and in connection with this subject, 
 a correct theory is the most practical thing in 
 the world ; for if the possibility of dispauperisation 
 be once established, the details of administration 
 present very little difficulty. The details of a 
 dispauperising administration have been set out 
 in many handbooks, and have been shown to 
 justify themselves by the results. To some 
 minds the force of a general principle has more 
 authority, and to them the following attempt 
 to analyse the economic significance of pauperism 
 and dependence is specially addressed. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ... . I 
 
 I. THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW l8 
 
 II. THE OLD POOR LAW ... 35 
 
 III. THE POOR LAW AMENDMENT ACT OF 1834, COM- 
 
 MONLY CALLED "THE NEW POOR LAW" . . 69 
 
 IV. THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE NEW POOR LAW . . IOI 
 
 V. THE RELATION BETWEEN LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY 
 
 AGENCIES OF RELIEF 139 
 
 VI. THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 176 
 
PUBLIC RELIEF OF THE POOR 
 IN ENGLAND 
 
 INTRODUCTORY 
 
 BEFORE we can justly appreciate the importance 
 of a good system of public relief, we must 
 endeavour to understand how very limited an 
 influence it has in_jpj^ompting a healthy orgaji- 
 isation ___o_s.Qiety . The necessity of relief is 
 evidence of stunted growth or social disorder. 
 Medical treatment, skilfully applied, may remove 
 the causes of physical disease, but relief is only 
 a treatment of symptoms : it never touches, 
 except to aggravate them, the economic causes 
 of poverty and destitution. 
 
 It is necessary, at the very outset, to insist 
 on this subordinate importance of relief. Other- 
 wise it is impossible to form a right judgment 
 as to the true relation of social well-being to 
 
2 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 public relief. For this reason, a fuller ex- 
 position of this aspect of the subject will not 
 be out of place. 
 
 That admirable writer and thinker Dr 
 Chalmers was fond of urging that there 
 is what he called " a previous and better 
 mechanism of society," that is to say, previous 
 to, and better than, any system of public relief. 
 Chalmers meant, first, that the ordinary economic 
 exchange of services and property gives to 
 members of society an honourable interdepend- 
 ence and coherence with which a system of 
 public relief tends to interfere ; further, that if 
 this purely economic organisation fails at any 
 point, there is a second line of defence, namely, 
 the natural affection of the family and the 
 benevolence arising out of ordinary human 
 intercourse. To this " previous and better 
 mechanism " Chalmers was anxious to entrust 
 the treatment of social misfortune, and he 
 deprecated altogether the recourse to elaborate 
 systems of public relief; most emphatically of 
 all he objected to compulsory levies for the 
 relief of the poor. 
 
 In the light of modern speculations on the 
 origins of society, Dr Chalmers' definition may 
 admit of amendment. The superior mechanism 
 to which he refers is not perhaps earlier or 
 
INTRODUCTORY 3 
 
 previous in point of time. It is rather con- 
 current in the sense of being competitive with 
 a primitive condition which it is superseding. 
 It is an illuminating generalisation of Maine 
 that the progress of civil society has been, 
 and still is, from a condition of status to one 
 of contract* Our social organisation is the 
 result of the struggle between these opposing 
 influences. On the one hand we have the 
 better mechanism, the new contractual basis of 
 society, founded on personal liberty, property, 
 and exchange ; on the other hand the feudal, 
 and subsequently the parochial, status of de- 
 pendence which the better mechanism is re- 
 placing. Public relief is, in fact, a relic of 
 the condition of status. We should vary, 
 therefore, Dr Chalmers' language by describing 
 the ordinary exchange of services and property, 
 supplemented in case of need by family affection 
 and natural benevolence, as a better mechanism 
 which furnishes the modern economic alternative 
 to the primitive dependence of a condition of 
 status. 
 
 As a preliminary to forming a judgment on 
 
 systems of relief, we ought to make some study 
 
 of the interaction of these two social principles. 
 
 Even a superficial consideration will make us 
 
 * Maine's Ancient Law, 8th edition, p. 170. 
 
4 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 aware of influences which promote the growth 
 of the independent industrial life, and of 
 influences also which prevent the decay of 
 the status of pauperism. We must, there- 
 fore, follow this clue somewhat further, and 
 regard our social organisation as a whole, its 
 history, the principles by which it has grown, the 
 primitive and less favourable conditions out of 
 which it has been developed, and which still linger 
 to the detriment of sections of the community. 
 To state the line of study suggested, in terms 
 strictly relevant to our present enquiry, we have 
 to consider the causes, on the one hand, of the 
 progress of wealth, and, on the other, of the 
 permanence of poverty and other primitive 
 disabilities. 
 
 If we would understand the present, we must 
 then, as Mr Bagehot has happily phrased it, study 
 man as an antiquity. Time was when economic 
 speculation overlooked this necessity, and dealt 
 largely in plausible but unverifiable assumptions 
 about the origin of society. There were days 
 when men talked of the Social Contract and 
 assumed the primitive perfection of the natural 
 man. The position to-day is for the serious 
 student entirely changed. The necessity of the 
 historical method is everywhere acknowledged. 
 Correct theory is indeed the most useful and 
 
INTRODUCTORY 5 
 
 practical thing in the world, but correct theory 
 can only be reached by the aid of careful verifica- 
 tion from the facts of history. 
 
 Most of us if I may judge by my own 
 experience were taught some little history in 
 our youth, but for the most part in the anecdotal 
 fashion. We read of the adventures of Alfred, of 
 the wars of the Edwards, of the many marriages 
 of Henry VIII., but the fact the most important 
 fact that during the greater part of that time 
 the poorer population were serfs, was very little 
 obtruded on our notice. The Poor Law of 
 Elizabeth is generally represented to us as a 
 happy inspiration of the Queen and her coun- 
 cillors, and not as what it undoubtedly was^ 
 
 revival in a modified form of the then expiring 
 
 *- * ~ * ff 
 
 feudal system. 
 
 We cannot, here, discuss in detail the village 
 community, the feudal system, serfdom and the 
 gradual emancipation of the serf. The inquiry 
 must be pursued in the works of Seebohm, Maine, 
 Stubbs, and other scholars. We are justified, 
 however, in asserting that the primitive condition 
 of society in England, as well as elsewhere, was by 
 no means one of wealth and freedom, but rather 
 of poverty and subjection, and by these terms we 
 mean all the disabilities belonging to that condition. 
 Men suffered not only from insufficiency of food 
 
6 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 and raiment and shelter, but also from the fact 
 that they were a prey to the elemental forces of 
 nature, then unsubdued and little understood, as 
 well as to the tyranny of their own superstition 
 and of the rigid ordinance of custom. In their 
 relation to their fellow-men, they were the 
 victims of a reign of cruelty and antagonism un- 
 redeemed by any appreciation of the advantages 
 which subsequent generations have derived from 
 a co-operation based on exchange of property and 
 service and on the sub-division of labour. 
 
 Too often the problem of poverty has been 
 presented to us as one requiring an explanation 
 of how the poor have fallen away from some 
 original condition of comfort which existed in an 
 earlier golden age. This view does not appear 
 to rest on any solid foundation of fact or theory. 
 Whether or not there is any perfectibility of 
 society in the future, there has been no state of 
 perfection in the past. What we have to explain 
 is, how a portion of the population (if we are not 
 justified in saying the whole population) has suc- 
 ceeded in clothing its nakedness with the material 
 advantages of civilisation ; and with regard to 
 poverty, our inquiry is not how classes have 
 become poor from having at one time been rich, 
 but how classes have remained poor, unable to 
 rise or at least to rise far above the proletariate 
 
INTRODUCTORY 7 
 
 life of ever imminent destitution in which once 
 nearly the whole population was involved. 
 
 Before, then, we can come to any opinion 
 of the best methods to be adopted by the com- 
 munity for the relief of the unfortunate, or of the 
 claim sometimes put forward on behalf of the 
 proletariate, that it has a right to help itself 
 to the property of the richer section of society, 
 two important lines of causality have to be con- 
 sidered. 
 
 I. What are the essential elements of that 
 economic progress, such as it is, which has, with- 
 out doubt, conferred on a large and probably 
 an increasing portion of civil society so much 
 prosperity and contentment ? 
 
 II. What are the conditions which have 
 retained another section in a state of primitive 
 poverty ? 
 
 There are, of course, many subsidiary ques- 
 tions which might be raised at this point. Two 
 only need be noticed and then set aside, as far as 
 our present inquiry is concerned. Are the rich, 
 it is asked, growing richer, and the poor growing 
 poorer ? And, if so, do the revolutionary recon- 
 structions of society, which are proposed as 
 remedy, offer reasonable prospect of amending 
 this deplorable condition of things ? In answer 
 to the first of these questions, we can only 
 
8 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 refer to the statisticians, who are unanimous 
 in asserting that the material condition of 
 the labouring class has been progressively 
 improving without serious interruption within 
 historical times. Here, for instance, is a recent 
 pronouncement of Sir Robert Giffen, Economic 
 Journal, September 1900, p. 299 : 
 
 " The conditions of prosperity in this country are generally 
 stable, and this view, it may be added, appears to be confirmed 
 by experience. The conditions of our prosperity, such as they 
 are, have existed for about two hundred years at least, in which 
 national and individual prosperity have gone on increasing, 
 and increasing apparently at an even greater rate in the most 
 recent periods than at earlier dates." 
 
 Then, in answer to a critic who suggested that 
 the period of the Napoleonic wars was a period 
 of retrogression, he says that, even admitting 
 temporary fluctuations which I gather he thinks 
 are generally exaggerated there is no room to 
 doubt that on the average there has been no 
 retrogression at the beginning of the century 
 or any other time, and further, that the improve- 
 ment has included all classes.* 
 
 It is, perhaps, necessary to add that material 
 
 * The subject is treated in great detail in Leroy Beaulieu's 
 Repartition des Richesses, and the reader may judge very well for 
 himself as to the nature and extent of the improvement by reference 
 to such works as Ludlow and Lloyd Jones on The Progress of the 
 Working Class, 1867, and to such Reports as that of Mr Chad wick 
 on the Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population, 1842. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 9 
 
 prosperity is not the same thing as happiness, and 
 that if the question was : Are the poor happier ? 
 it might be difficult to give a decided answer. 
 Happiness is a thing strangely independent at 
 times of material conditions, and it is these 
 alone which we are now considering. 
 
 In answer to the second question, as to the 
 possibility of revolutionary change, obviously, if 
 the statisticians are right, there is a strong 
 presumption in favour of trusting to the slow 
 tendency towards greater equality of condition 
 which is already in operation, and against having 
 resort to revolutionary experiment. If the 
 statisticians are wrong, it may be that the 
 imperfections which we notice are incapable 
 of complete reformation, and that we ought to 
 submit to them rather than destroy a fabric 
 which, such as it is, does afford to many a 
 great measure of prosperity and contentment. 
 
 The projecting of Utopias has been a favourite 
 pastime with the ingenious and benevolent in 
 all ages, and we might unanswerably base 
 our reluctance to embark in any wholesale experi- 
 ment of the kind by pointing to the universal 
 fate of all such attempts namely, failure. Our 
 power to conceive Utopias is, indeed, entirely 
 dependent on our appreciation of the happier 
 conditions of life which already actually prevail 
 
io PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 among portions of the populations, as the result of 
 social principles which are actual and not Utopian. 
 We cannot permanently realise these happier 
 conditions, arbitrarily and per saltum, without 
 adopting also the principles on which they are 
 founded, and in grasping by revolutionary devices 
 at these higher ideals, we run the risk of losing 
 the substance of much prosperity for a futile 
 snatch at what will probably prove to be a 
 shadow. 
 
 Long ago Aristotle remarked that not the 
 gods themselves could now alter the fact that 
 Troy was sacked, and it appears to me that 
 we are much in the same position with regard 
 to the architecture and building of society. 
 Whether we like it or not, the fabric of society 
 has grown up round the support of certain 
 fundamental principles. These principles are not, 
 of course, absolutely rigid and immutable ; they 
 have been, and are, subject to expansion and 
 modification ; but viewing the history of their 
 development as a whole, we find that their main 
 tendency is definite and unmistakable. Society 
 has moved through a long series of ages, slowly, 
 but, as we can now trace, with unerring precision, 
 from communism of property to private owner- 
 ship, from slavery to personal liberty, and from 
 the subordination of all ranks under the yoke 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 1 
 
 of custom to the greater mobility of a society 
 organised on the basis of contract and exchange. 
 We could not attain, and even if we could attain, 
 we could not permanently retain, the advantages 
 resulting from the working of these social 
 tendencies, if we discarded the principles which 
 have given them birth. 
 
 I make these observations because, in the 
 inquiry on which we have embarked, we must 
 decline to be led aside in order to consider 
 proposals for revolutionary changes ; such 
 changes, for instance, as the abolition of private 
 property, the prohibition of private initiative, the 
 substitution of a State monopoly in place of 
 freedom of manufacture and commerce, or the 
 levelling up of the condition of the poorer classes 
 by devices designed to confer on the " have nots " 
 the right to live on the taxation of the "haves." 
 The whole history of society testifies to the deep- 
 rooted repugnance which human nature has at 
 all times shown to such schemes, when brought 
 into practical contact with them, and it is not to 
 be thought that we, in our brief flitting across 
 the stage of life, can alter the verdict of all 
 previous time. 
 
 If, then, we must dismiss revolutionary recon- 
 structions from our view, is it necessary for us to 
 acquiesce in all the disabilities and wrongs of the 
 
12 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 present situation ? This, of course, is not the 
 view of any reasonable man. 
 
 We are thus brought back to the twofold 
 inquiry which we propounded a few pages back. 
 Its importance warrants us, as we return from 
 this digression, in restating the problem in 
 slightly varied terms. 
 
 I. What are the instruments and arts of 
 economic progress which have reared the fabric 
 of civilised society, and given to a portion of 
 the community many indubitable advantages? 
 
 II. What are the obstacles which forbid to 
 the poorer class the use of these instruments and 
 the practice of these arts ? This second question 
 may happily be further qualified, for we shall find 
 that already progress has been made, that the arts 
 of thriving are not wholly unknown to the labouring 
 class, that they have availed themselves of the 
 privilege of personal liberty, the security of 
 property, and the advantages of exchange. 
 The problem, therefore, before us, in so far as our 
 object is a practical one, is not to inaugurate 
 any new social principle, but, on the one hand, to 
 quicken and extend certain salutary lines of effort, 
 and, on the other hand, to dissipate and remove 
 certain prejudices and habits of primitive origin 
 which stand in the way of a complete permeation of 
 a proletariate class with the instincts of property. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 13 
 
 These considerations seem to suggest that if 
 we regard this subject not merely as students, but 
 as practical reformers, it will not do for us to 
 confine our efforts to the administration of relief. 
 We must devote some of our time and energy to 
 understand and explain what are the arts of well- 
 being. We must endeavour to vindicate their 
 usefulness and equity, to make their practice 
 attractive, to prove and teach that the conditions 
 which give security (and security is the principal 
 material element in civilisation) to the rich are 
 capable of conferring the same benefit on the 
 poor, and that the connection supposed by some 
 to exist between poverty and manual labour is not 
 a necessary one. 
 
 By a neglect of this twofold aspect of the 
 question we are apt to assume too readily that 
 periodic destitution is an inevitable incident in 
 the life of the labourer. Against this attitude 
 of despair we most earnestly protest. Death 
 and sickness are inevitable incidents in human 
 life, but destitution is economically avoidable. 
 Its avoidance depends on two things : the 
 quickened economic competence of our in- 
 dustrial population, and the relaxation of the 
 primitive feudal status of servitude which, as the 
 pauper habit, still lingers in our midst, arresting 
 progress and development. 
 
14 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 Even as things are at present, it would seem, 
 if we may trust the conclusions of Sir Robert 
 Giffen, that the progressive influences tend, on 
 the average, to prevail over the retrogressive 
 influences ; but it must be confessed that economic 
 influences of improvement are little aided by 
 intelligent assent and co-operation. It is our 
 duty, we submit, to see that this favourable 
 balance of power is maintained, and that, if 
 possible, the attractiveness of the contractual 
 economic life is increased, and that our system 
 of public relief shall not become unduly absorbent 
 of a dependent population. We must in fact 
 recognise that there are constructive and obstruc- 
 tive influences at work. For the great popula- 
 tions and complex industrial interests of modern 
 civilisation, well-being cannot rest on any system 
 of public relief, but on ubiquitous, automatically 
 working principles of social intercourse. Relief, 
 then, cannot be socially constructive, and we 
 must be at pains to see that it does not become 
 an obstructive influence to the true line of 
 economic development which, freed from its 
 interference, would be more rapid and inevit- 
 able. 
 
 Before we can appreciate the uses and abuses 
 of systems of public relief, we ought to get 
 firmly into our minds the antagonism of these 
 
INTRODUCTORY 15 
 
 two principles. The keynote of the one is 
 personal liberty, involving personal responsibility, 
 property, and free exchange ; of the other, the 
 irresponsibility of parochial status, the com- 
 munism of the poor-rate, and the forced circula- 
 tion of money by taxation and State monopoly. 
 Each of these principles is creative or absorbent 
 of a population appropriate to itself. Our busi- 
 ness is to secure a free outlet for the true con- 
 structive forces of social life, and to lessen the 
 retentive paralysing power of man's primitive 
 immobility and indolence, characteristics of mind 
 which are apt to be impervious to the beneficent 
 action of economic motive. 
 
 So much is to be said for that concurrent and 
 better mechanism which, if successfully developed, 
 might, it is hoped, make systems of relief, if not 
 altogether unnecessary, at least much less pro- 
 minent elements in our social arrangements than 
 unfortunately they are at present. I hope that 
 in these pages it may be possible to keep in view 
 this subordinate character of systems of public 
 relief, as of a thing that is in course of being 
 replaced by a better mechanism. The line of 
 exposition which it is proposed to follow may 
 now be mapped out. In the first chapter the 
 origin of our English Poor Law, a very important 
 
16 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 part of our system of public relief, is discussed. 
 In the two following chapters (II. and III.), it 
 is proposed to set out how the principle of a 
 compulsory assessment for the poor was, in 
 England, developed and extended till it grew 
 into the abuses of the Old Poor Law, a state 
 of things which called for drastic amendment 
 in the year 1834. The New Poor Law, as it 
 has ever since been called, was then introduced 
 our present system. Some account of its history, 
 its merits and dements, will be given in Chapter 
 IV. Chapter V. will be devoted to considering 
 the relations which obtain, or which ought to 
 obtain, between legal and voluntary agencies of 
 relief. 
 
 In the sixth and last chapter an endeavour 
 will be made to estimate the direction in which 
 things seem to be drifting at the present time. 
 We have already reached a position from which 
 we can see that there is a concurrent and better 
 mechanism which promises a fuller amendment 
 of social evils than any system of public de- 
 pendence. This requires to be quickened and 
 safeguarded, and when we have considered, in 
 the detailed manner proposed, the history and 
 practice of our English system of relief, we shall 
 be able to say how far this has been, and can be, 
 kept in its subordinate place, and prevented from 
 
INTRODUCTORY 
 
 interfering detrimentally with the healthy develop- 
 ment of a society in which family and individual 
 life must learn to be self-supporting and honour- 
 ably interdependent. 
 
 In the earlier chapters we shall have been 
 encumbered with details, and the subject of relief 
 will unavoidably appear to grow in importance. 
 It will be an object of the last chapter, therefore, 
 to bring back the various parts into proper pro- 
 portion; to remind the reader when taking leave 
 of the subject, as we do when we begin, that relief 
 is not a constructive force of social well-being, 
 and that, if not carefully ordered, it has been, and 
 still may be, an obstructive influence to sound 
 economic progress. 
 
 B 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 
 
 THE origin of our English system of Poor Law 
 relief is to be found in causes, some of which 
 are common to human nature, while others are 
 special and peculiar to this country. 
 
 In all societies there are inequalities of 
 fortune, and when wealth has advanced to a 
 certain point, there has arisen, on the part of the 
 well-to-do, a desire to make some provision for 
 the destitute. Feudalism, from which an integral 
 part (the law of settlement,) of our Poor Law 
 system is derived, is not of course a distinctively 
 English institution, but the conversion of a rem- 
 nant of the expiring feudal system into a Poor 
 Law is peculiar to this country, and characteristic 
 of the continuity of English polity. 
 
 The facts which we must endeavour to divest 
 of technicalities may be briefly stated. 
 
 The manorial and other feudal courts which 
 presided over the life of a semi-servile population 
 
 18 
 
CHAP, i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 19 
 
 exercised incidentally certain powers of relief. 
 Originally this jurisdiction was for the enforce- 
 ment of a certain organisation of labour, based on 
 the complete adscription of the labourer to the 
 \ soil. In prescribing duties, it also prescribed 
 1 maintenance. For instance, one of the duties 
 assumed by the manorial courts was the super- 
 intendence of the re-marriage of widows. The 
 object of this was, no doubt, to procure the perfor- 
 mance of service-dues, but incidentally it brought 
 about a provision for the widow and her children. 
 Very early, however, the eleemosynary duties of 
 the community were directed by the Church. 
 From the earliest times there were charitable 
 endowments, and by custom a portion of the 
 parish tithe was devoted to the relief of the poor. 
 In feudal times all England was mapped out into 
 manors, and from the ecclesiastical and eleemosy- 
 nary point of view, the manor was the parish, and 
 ever since the days of Elizabeth the parish (or, as 
 now, the union of parishes) has been the Poor Law 
 unit of administration. Within the same areas there 
 were, therefore, two jurisdictions : the manorial 
 courts, repressing vagrancy and enforcing feudal 
 servitude, and the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, ad- 
 ministering certain charitable funds. In course of 
 time these funds proved insufficient, and voluntary 
 offerings were invited. The curate was then to 
 
20 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 demand contributions. Then, as this plan was 
 unsuccessful, the bishop was called in to admonish, 
 and next the justices were directed to assess and 
 enforce payment. Finally, at the end of the reign 
 of Elizabeth, in 1597, and in 16,01 by. the -great 
 i consolidating statute of the 43 Eliz. c. 2, the first 
 / universal compulsory poor rate was enacted, and 
 overseers were appointed who, with the church- 
 wardens, became the authority for administering 
 the relief of the poor. 
 
 Side by side with this, the benevolent, aspect 
 of the Poor Law, and applicable in the same area, 
 the manor or parish, there was an expiring system 
 of labour regulation, viz., the feudal labour organi- 
 sation ; and here it is that our subject gains so 
 much from the antiquarian labours of the his- 
 torians of early custom and law. Early Poor Law 
 legislation, prior to Elizabeth, was directed mainly 
 to revive and enforce the expiring feudal laws.- 
 The repression of vagrants, as the migrant labourer 
 was called, the compelling the wanderer to return 
 to his own place, the monopoly of trade claimed and 
 enforced by the trade guilds of the towns, and the 
 consequent exclusion of the migrant peasant, the 
 forcible bringing back of the labourer to the 
 place where his labour was due to some feudal 
 lord, all these, though undoubtedly Poor Laws in 
 the sense that they aimed at the " Management 
 
i.] * THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 21 
 
 of the Poor," are really attempts to revive the 
 institution of feudal serfdom. The poorer popula- 
 tion, which was thus "managed," had only 
 recently been serfs, that is, persons incapable of 
 owning property, of disposing of their labour, and 
 of marrying and giving in marriage without the 
 leave of their feudal superior in a word, they had 
 been legally incapable of entertaining any economic 
 motive whatsoever. Feudalism, in fact, forbade to 
 the serf the use of those instruments and the 
 practice of those arts which a few pages back we 
 characterised as the instruments and arts of 
 thriving. It is from this connection of the Poor 
 Law with an older institution that we get that fatal 
 attitude of immobility impervious to economic 
 motive, which as we shall presently see is the 
 characteristic of the pauper habit. 
 
 The point at which the New Benevolence 
 and the old System of Management completely 
 coalesced is of somewhat later date, and a more 
 detailed account of it is required. 
 
 Earlier Poor Law legislation, as already said, 
 was directed chiefly to maintaining the feudal 
 polity. If a vagrant or a landless man was found 
 in any manor or parish, he was not relieved ; he 
 was punished, repressed, sent back to the place 
 where his labour was due. There, according to 
 the feudal ideal, it was assumed that he would 
 
22 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 find work and maintenance, or at least be main- 
 tained by the alms of the community. Time 
 came, however, when a general commutation of 
 labour services for money rents took place, a 
 proof that servile labour, owing to changes of trade 
 notably the rise of sheep-farming in Tudor times, 
 was becoming inconvenient and unprofitable. 
 It was then no longer an object with any landlord 
 to bring back his fugitive serfs. The question 
 then arose : Where and by whom was the emanci- 
 pated but destitute serf to be relieved ? 
 
 The answer does not at first seem to have 
 been formulated with any definiteness, till, as the 
 pressure on the maintenance provided by the 
 Poor Law increased, great inconvenience arose 
 from the uncertainty, and then the answer given 
 was more mischievous than the former uncertainty. 
 
 Dr Burn, in his History of the Poor Laws, 
 1764, p. 106, notes the "antiquity of settlements," 
 erroneously supposed, as he says, to have been 
 the invention of an Act of Charles II. (13 & 14 
 Charles II. c. 12). But the origin of settlements 
 is, he shows, of much earlier date. By the Act 
 of 12 Richard II. c. 7, the poor had been directed 
 " to abide in cities and towns where they then 
 were." Then, " if these cities and towns could 
 not or would not maintain them, they were by 
 subsequent acts of legislation to draw themselves 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 23 
 
 to other towns within the hundred, or to the towns 
 where they were born. Next they were to abide 
 in the hundred where they last dwelt, or were best 
 known or were born ; then in the place where they 
 were born or made their last abode by the space 
 of three years. . . . And this continued for a 
 long time. In the reign of King James I. they 
 were to go to the place where they last dwelt by 
 the space of one year, and if that could not be 
 known, then to the place of their birth. Finally, 
 by the 13 & 14 Charles II. c. 12, the place of a 
 person's settlement was to be where he last dwelt 
 for the space of forty days, either as a native, 
 householder, sojourner, apprentice or servant." 
 Forty days, Burn remarks, is a short period, and 
 all subsequent legislation with regard to settle- 
 ments is restrictive of this too easy method of 
 obtaining a settlement. 
 
 Indeed this very act contained provision for 
 that purpose. It enacted that poor persons 
 coming into a parish might be removed and 
 taken back to their place of settlement, not 
 because they had become, but because they 
 might become, chargeable. This, it will be 
 observed, is a revival of the principle of the old 
 feudal law which provided for the complete 
 adscription of the labourer to the soil, but with 
 a difference in practice. Formerly the lord of 
 
24 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the emigrant serf could have him brought back 
 to his place of servitude. Now when that 
 servitude was no longer profitable, the parish 
 invaded by the immigrant serf claimed a right 
 to drive him out. The adscription of the labourer 
 to the soil was in both cases complete, but the 
 interest which put the law in motion against him 
 was different. Burn justly remarks on this law 
 of removal that, though the chief interest centres 
 in the Act of Charles II., it is, like the law of 
 Settlement, of much older origin. The poor, he 
 says, quoting a series of statutes, were first re- 
 quired to remove themselves, to go, rest, and 
 abide ; then, a penalty was ordained if they did 
 not go, then they were sworn to go, and in 
 Edward the Sixth's time they were to be 
 conveyed. 
 
 This, then, was the answer to the question : 
 Where were the poor to be relieved ? They were 
 to be relieved at the place of their settlement, 
 and in order that this might be carried out 
 conveniently, they were practically prevented 
 from leaving the place of their settlement. They 
 were thus formally, and by law, condemned to a 
 complete adscription to the soil. 
 
 The principle of settlement and removal, an 
 integral and appropriate element of feudalism, was 
 thus revived for the convenience of those who had 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 25 
 
 to administer the benevolent legislation of Eliza- 
 beth, and it is to be observed that the economic 
 movement which it endeavoured to repress was 
 in reality the first stirring of the industrial era. 
 This unfortunate conflict between a well-intended 
 benevolence and the reorganising influence of 
 economic motive is worth a closer examination. 
 Just as it has been observed that slavery is a 
 step in advance of the indiscriminate massacre 
 of prisoners, suggested probably because of the 
 advantage to be derived from slave labour, so 
 also the decay of slavery has been occasioned not 
 so much by religious and moral conviction, as by 
 the fact that slave labour cannot compete success- 
 fully with free labour. It is asserted on high 
 authority (Morley : Life of Cobden, vol. i. p. 99), 
 even with regard to modern instances of slavery, 
 that no community has ever abolished slavery of 
 its own accord until the institution had ceased to 
 be profitable. This appears to be especially true 
 with regard to the decay of feudal serfdom. It 
 was the superiority of the new economic condi- 
 tions of freedom of labour, contract and exchange, 
 quite as much as religious sentiment, which 
 disintegrated the old order of things. 
 
 It is important in this connection to observe 
 the happy results which follow from allowing the 
 organisation of society to proceed at the bidding 
 
26 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 of what we have termed the economic motive. 
 On the other hand, in contrast to this purely 
 economic development, to which we owe the 
 ordered security of our modern industrial system, 
 we have to consider the effect of legislation 
 of which the motive was philanthropic, and 
 which took the form of awarding maintenance 
 to the status of pauperism. It will suggest to us 
 the thought, that to follow the line of economic 
 development with assent and co-operation is a 
 truer philanthropy than a benevolent but 
 empirical treatment of symptoms, which leaves 
 untouched the deep-seated causes of arrested 
 economic growth. 
 
 The last years of the reign of Elizabeth 
 witnessed a consolidation by statute of such a 
 policy of frontal attack, if the phrase may be 
 allowed, on the evil of destitution and poverty, 
 and it is worth while to compare the results of 
 this with the development on the lines of the 
 economic order which it obstructed and at length 
 brought to a stand-still. 
 
 The temper of the time at the end of the 
 sixteenth century was what we should call philan- 
 thropic. In Sir Symonds D'Ewes' diary of 
 Elizabethan parliaments it is narrated how sub- 
 scriptions for the poor were collected in both 
 Houses of Parliament, and so much compulsion 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 27 
 
 was used that the names of these who did not 
 contribute were publicly read out (" they amounted 
 to about forty-four "). Several Poor Law bills, and 
 the scarcely less important Charitable Uses bill, 
 were referred to a committee, on which Bacon, 
 Cecil, and other Elizabethan statesmen were 
 nominated to serve. This committee was 
 responsible for the final shape taken by the great 
 Poor Law statute, the 43 Eliz. c. 2, and also for 
 the Statute of Charitable Uses, the 43 Eliz. c. 4, 
 passed in the same year 1601. 
 
 The legislature of the day clearly felt that 
 the old feudal duties and maintenance could no 
 longer be enforced, and that the statute of 
 labourers and the ordinances designed to regulate 
 wages, if operative at all, were no protection to 
 the poorer class. Its remedy for the occasion 
 was the Poor Law of Elizabeth (43 Eliz. c. 2). 
 
 Further, in the complicated quarrel of the 
 English nation with the Roman Church, there 
 had been a great diversion of endowments from 
 charitable as well as ecclesiastical uses to secular 
 purposes. The confiscations of Henry VIII. and 
 Edward VI. had not observed with too much nicety 
 the distinction between the two. The legislation 
 of the time suggests that while the ecclesiastical 
 controversy was maintained, there was a disposi- 
 tion to restore, and to prevent the further diversion 
 
28 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAF. 
 
 of, charitable endowments made by pious founders 
 for various public objects other than ecclesiastical. 
 
 It is always stated that the Elizabethan 
 Statute of Charitable Uses was intended to apply 
 to endowments for the poor only, though it is true 
 that its protection was through analogy extended 
 by subsequent decisions of the courts to all endow- 
 ments, a policy which has in fact made the terms 
 Charitable Use synonymous with Public Trust. 
 
 Now it is a coincidence worthy of notice that 
 these two statutes enacting a compulsory assess- 
 ment for the relief of the poor, and the rigid pre- 
 servation of endowments for the use of the poor, 
 were passed contemporaneously, and that two 
 centuries later an agitation was raised almost 
 simultaneously against the abuses to which they 
 had given rise. 
 
 Contemporaneously with the discussion which 
 led in 1834 to the reform of the Poor Law, a 
 violent crusade, inaugurated by Lord Brougham, 
 had been raised against the abuses of endowed 
 charity. By that time it had become apparent 
 that the perpetuity given by the Elizabethan 
 Statute of Charitable Uses to the often very ill- 
 considered wishes of pious founders was a source 
 of abundant demoralisation and fraud. 
 
 The contrast which inevitably suggests itself 
 is, that on the one hand we have the philanthropic 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 29 
 
 legislation of Elizabeth growing in time into 
 the intolerable abuses of the Old Poor Law, and 
 into the frauds and demoralisation connected with 
 endowed charity, as exposed in Lord Brougham's 
 letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, and in the evidence 
 brought before various commissions of inquiry. 
 On the other hand, we have the break-up of 
 feudalism, the new organisation of liberty and 
 contract and free exchange forced upon us, not 
 by sentimentalists, but by the inevitable, irre- 
 sistible pressure of economic expediency.* The 
 one has landed us in our present pauper system ; 
 to the other we owe the material comfort, 
 assured progress and security of modern civilisa- 
 tion. 
 
 In describing the complete amalgamation of 
 
 * Note. By the term " inevitable, irresistible pressure of economic 
 expediency," I mean the line of conduct resulting from the preference 
 which men, and bodies of men, will always show for an attainment 
 of their objects by the least effort. The " concurrence " of different 
 policies of action makes the choice of alternatives a very important, 
 though perhaps unconscious, episode in the lives both of individuals 
 and societies. The economic motive, unless coerced by fraud or 
 force, will generally be decisive at such crises of choice. The 
 conclusion drawn is, that an intelligent following of the economic 
 motive seems to lead most certainly to the wide-spread social 
 satisfaction to which the sentimentalist seeks to lead us by short- 
 cuts which too often, as in the case considered in the text, take us 
 astray into an impassable quagmire. The ultimate identity of the 
 ethical and economic motive is secured by the fact that the main 
 instrument of industrial organisation is exchange, a process which 
 gives profit to both parties. The reformation of Society requires 
 that we shall appreciate and take advantage of this natural law. 
 
30 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the old repressive police regulation of the poor 
 with the new stream of benevolent relief pro- 
 vided formally by the Elizabethan law, we 
 named the 13 & 14 Charles II. c. 12 as the 
 point of junction. By this Act the so-called Law 
 of Settlements, the new relief legislation, was 
 formally and finally grafted on to the old feudal 
 conception of settlement, and the two lines of 
 policy definitely coalesced. 
 \ It is easy to understand how with the break- 
 
 up of the old security of serfdom there were 
 many houseless wanderers, and how the chari- 
 table funds available for their relief were sub- 
 jected to pressure. It is easy also to understand 
 how a comparatively wealthy community agreed 
 to tax itself to provide more funds. What 
 might surprise us is, that this question of where 
 and by whom each claimant for relief was to be 
 relieved did not arise sooner, or, at all events, 
 that no very serious attempt to deal with it 
 was made till the time of Charles II. 
 
 The explanation, I think, is, that though 1601 
 saw the principle of assessment made com- 
 pulsory and universal, this law was not carried 
 into effect with any great rapidity and certainty, 
 and for long the sums given away were pro- 
 bably very small. By degrees, however, the 
 law was brought into operation, and the cir- 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 31 
 
 cumstances in which this took place are peculiar 
 and special to England. 
 
 They can be best understood by referring to 
 the contrast of Scotland, where enactments for 
 a compulsory assessment were passed about the 
 same time. Even earlier than the Elizabethan 
 legislation, i.e. in 1579, an Act, in many par- 
 ticulars similar to the English law, was passed, 
 and authority was given, " to tax and stent the 
 whole inhabitants within the parish " ; but in 
 Scotland the Act remained a dead letter, and 
 it was not till quite modern times that a general 
 assessment for the poor was made in Scotland ; 
 indeed there are, even at the present day, 
 parishes where the relief of the poor is managed 
 without the aid of a rate. The administration 
 of the law was confided to the Kirk- Sessions, 
 and the weaker central administration of Scotland 
 never enforced its execution in respect of a 
 compulsory assessment. Many years afterwards, 
 in 1817, a committee of the House of Commons 
 (Sturges Bourne's Committee) was inquiring 
 into the mismanagement of the English Poor 
 Law, and sent to find out how such matters 
 were conducted in Scotland. The following 
 sentence occurs in their report : 
 
 " The system (i.e. of a compulsory assessment) is peculiar 
 to Great Britain ; and even in Scotland, where a law similar 
 
32 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 in principle was about the same period enacted, the in- 
 telligent persons to whom the administration of it has been 
 intrusted, appear by a valuable report (for which your Com- 
 mittee is indebted to the prompt exertions of the General 
 Assembly of the Church of Scotland) to have had so much 
 foresight and judgment as to its effects that they have generally 
 and successfully endeavoured to avoid having recourse to a 
 compulsory assessment." 
 
 and the report of the General Assembly 
 goes on to express its approval of the course 
 followed. 
 
 In England the central authority had more 
 power, and " the judgment and foresight of the 
 intelligent persons " to whom the carrying out 
 of the law was committed, were not allowed to 
 frustrate the intention of the legislature as de- 
 clared by the letter of the law. 
 
 Still, even in England, this Act was not got 
 into operation without a struggle. The fact is 
 noted in most of the books, and very fully in an 
 industrious and interesting volume, The Early 
 History of English Poor Relief, by Miss 
 Leonard. Miss Leonard, I may observe^ in 
 passing, seems to regard the Poor Law as a 
 pretty piece of benevolence given to the country 
 by those eminent philanthropists, Elizabeth and 
 Charles I. a superficial interpretation, as I con- 
 tend, of this grave economic episode ; but the 
 
i.] THE ORIGIN OF THE POOR LAW 33 
 
 facts that she chronicles are of great interest 
 and importance.* 
 
 Miss Leonard makes it very clear that great 
 pressure had to be brought to bear on the local 
 authorities by the Privy Council through the 
 justices, in order to get the Act into operation. 
 
 A pamphlet published in 1622, Grievous 
 Grones for the Poor, complains that there has 
 been no collection for the poor, " these seven 
 years" in many parishes, especially in the 
 country towns. 
 
 Charles I.'s quarrel with his Parliament took 
 place in 1629, and from that date began his term 
 of personal government. One of his first acts, 
 viz., on 5th January 1630, was to issue "Orders 
 and Directions, with a Commission for the better 
 administration and more perfect information of 
 His Majesty how and by whom the laws and 
 statutes tending to the relief of the poor " and 
 kindred matters, "are executed throughout the 
 Kingdom." This commission (see Nicholls' 
 History of the Poor Law, vol. i. p. 254) was ap- 
 pointed not only for inquiry, but for the purpose 
 of enforcing the law. These " Orders and Direc- 
 tions " were pressed with much insistence, and 
 
 * I may also refer the reader to a paper published in the 
 Charity Organisation Review for December 1900, on the " Gradual 
 Introduction of the Poor Law." 
 
 C 
 
34 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. i. 
 
 reports are still extant in the State papers proving 
 that hitherto there had been much remissness in 
 carrying out the law. Miss Leonard appears to 
 be of opinion that we owe the English Poor Law 
 quite as much to Charles I. and his Privy Council 
 as to Elizabeth and her advisers, and there is 
 much probability in favour of the correctness of 
 this view. A considerable amount of evidence 
 could be produced, showing that the systematic 
 enforcement of a compulsory rate was occasionally 
 neglected in remote parishes till after the middle 
 of the 1 8th century. In many cases, as we may 
 gather from the careful inquiries of Sir F. Eden, 
 the amount collected and distributed was very 
 small. It was not till towards the close of the 
 1 8th century that the appetite which comes in 
 eating began to exert an inconvenient pressure 
 on the puzzled and ignorant authorities who were 
 charged with the administration of the law. 
 
 In the next chapter we will assume that the 
 principle of a compulsory assessment has been 
 established, and we must then endeavour to follow 
 the subsequent stages of its development down 
 to the time when its abuses were so glaring as to 
 render reform absolutely necessary, if society was 
 to be saved from moral and financial ruin. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE OLD POOR LAW 
 
 WE may now assume that the. principle of a 
 compulsory assessment for the poor has been duly 
 established. The law, we have reason to believe, 
 was only gradually enforced, and we took the year 
 1662, that is about sixty years after its first 
 enactment, as marking the complete adoption of 
 the principle. We selected this date, because 
 in this year an Act was passed designed to control 
 certain inconveniences and disputes which were 
 bound to arise from a complete adoption of the 
 principle of a compulsory assessment. We noted 
 how the earlier so-called Poor Law enactments 
 were directed to bringing back fugitive serfs to 
 the place where their labour was due, how, when 
 serf labour was no longer profitable, there was 
 wanting any force to maintain the old feudal 
 adscription of the labourer to the soil. There 
 arose, therefore, doubt and uncertainty, in practice 
 at all events, as to where and at whose charges 
 the destitute but emancipated serf was to be 
 
 35 
 
3 6 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 relieved. The parish to which he had come as 
 an immigrant resented his intrusion, and various 
 steps were taken to confine him to the parish of 
 his settlement, culminating in the Acts 13 & 14 
 Charles II. c. 12, which systematised the power 
 of Removal. By this law the parish authorities 
 were authorised to prefer complaint to two justices, 
 and, with their allowance, to remove any poor 
 man coming into the parish to better himself, even 
 though he made no application for relief. Now 
 it is obvious that if this law took effect, and could 
 not be evaded, the poorer population of England 
 was practically tied to the soil by a fetter which it 
 was impossible to break. 
 
 The most interesting economic problem con- 
 nected with the Poor Law is this doctrine of 
 Settlement and v its consequences. It deserves, 
 therefore, a fuller consideration. 
 
 The position was as follows : Everyone had 
 a settlement somewhere, presumably at the place of 
 his birth. When changes of industry began, there 
 were, of course, obvious inducements for labourers 
 to acquire new aptitudes for work, and to move 
 from parishes where there was a decaying em- 
 ployment to new centres of industry. This move- 
 ment, however, was practically prohibited by the 
 earlier feudal custom, now revived and systema- 
 tised in the Act which we have just mentioned, 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 37 
 
 and it is most interesting and important for us to 
 note how far this legislation was enforced, and how 
 far it was effective in procuring the stationary 
 attitude of the poorer classes which seemed 
 necessary for the convenience of the Poor Law 
 administrator. 
 
 We shall return to this point again, for it is 
 the central and most important fact in all Poor 
 Law history ; but for a moment it is necessary to 
 go back to the Elizabethan statute and see who 
 were the persons indicated therein as entitled to 
 be brought within the scope of a law predestined 
 to have such consequences. 
 
 It is a commonplace often repeated in Poor 
 Law literature, that if the terms of the Act of 
 Elizabeth had been strictly interpreted, many, if 
 not all, of the evils of the Old Poor Law would 
 have been avoided. Strict interpretation, how- 
 ever, though possible in a law court, is not to be 
 expected (so all experience shows) in local ad- 
 ministration, when confided to illiterate and often 
 interested local authorities. Mr Twisleton, one 
 of the most learned and able of the many able 
 assistant commissioners appointed under the Act 
 of 1834, has remarked on this generally received 
 belief that strict interpretation would have saved 
 the country from much evil ; but he adds, " I have 
 found no trace in any old writings of this inter- 
 
38 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND CHAP. 
 
 pretation of the Act," a view which, I am bound 
 to say, is entirely confirmed by all I have been 
 able to learn on the subject. 
 
 What, then, were the provisions of this Act 
 which were so wise when literally interpreted, 
 and so ruinous in the practice of the local 
 administrator ? 
 
 "The 43 Eliz. c. 2,"says Sir G. Nicholls, vol.i. p. 189, "the great 
 turning-point of our Poor Law legislation, is still the foundation 
 and text-book of English Poor Law. It is remarkable that 
 this most important statute has no preamble setting forth the 
 evils to be corrected and the good expected from it, as is the case 
 with most of the other statutes ; but it goes at once to its object, 
 and directs that in every parish, ' four, three, or two substantial 
 householders shall, under the hand and seal of two or more 
 justices of the peace be yearly nominated in Easter week, and 
 that these, with the church-wardens, shall be overseers of the 
 poor.' These overseers are 'to take order from time to 
 time ' with the consent of the justices, for carrying the several 
 provisions of the Act into effect. They are to raise ' weekly 
 or otherwise, in every parish, by taxation of every inhabitant, 
 parson, vicar, and other, and of every occupier of lands, houses, 
 tithes impropriate, or propriations of tithe, coal-mines and 
 saleable underwoods in the said parish, in such competent sum 
 and sums of money as they shall think fit.' 
 
 " The persons charged with the administration were 'to 
 meet together (as provided by 39 Eliz. c. 3) at least once in 
 every month, in the parish church, after Divine Service on the 
 Sunday, to consider of some good course to be taken, and of 
 some meet order to be set down in the premises.' Then at 
 the end of the year they were to give an account of their office 
 to the justices, and, in case of default, absence, or negligence, 
 they were made subject to a fine of aos." 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 39 
 
 The point to be observed here is, first, the 
 union of the ecclesiastical and civil jurisdictions. 
 The church-wardens are to be associated with cer- 
 tain new civil officers as overseers. They are to 
 transact their business on Sundays, at the parish 
 church, and they are put under the control and 
 supervision of the justices, who in this way were 
 made a sort of local authority for central control. 
 
 The second point to be noted is, that the in- 
 tention of the Act is clearly to rate all kinds of 
 property and persons. The phrase runs, " In- 
 habitants and Occupiers of lands, houses," etc. 
 The occupier was to be rated in respect of his 
 occupation ; but the inhabitant was to be rated in 
 some other way not clearly specified. 
 
 I think we may regard this order to rate in- 
 habitants as betokening a recognition that land 
 was not the only form of property which ought to 
 contribute to the relief of the poor. The practice, 
 however, was not carried out, notwithstanding 
 the clear intention of the law. In certain districts 
 where the clothing trade prevailed, it was cus 
 ternary to rate stock-in-trade, and the same 
 principle seems to have been carried out in 
 certain shipping towns, but for the most part the 
 burden was entirely laid upon land. The point 
 has been the subject of some legal controversy. 
 Lord Mansfield, one hundred and fifty years after 
 
40 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the passing of the Act of Elizabeth, declared that 
 it was impossible to rate personalty and stock-in- 
 trade. Lord Kenyon, in 1795, considered it 
 clear beyond debate that stock-in-trade was liable. 
 The practice sided with Lord Mansfield. After 
 the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act 
 1834, i.e. in 1836, an Act was passed, the 
 Parochial Assessment Act, regulating the sub- 
 jects liable to the poor rate. No mention was 
 made of stock-in-trade, and certain localities, 
 where stock-in-trade had hitherto been rated, 
 ceased the practice, and litigation ensued. It was 
 decided in the case of Queen v. Lutnsdatne that 
 stock-in-trade was still liable, and that a rate which 
 omitted stock-in-trade might be set aside.* This 
 practically made almost every rate in the country 
 liable to be set aside, and in order to bring the law 
 into conformity with the general practice, an Act 
 had to be passed exempting personal property from 
 the poor rate. The intention of the Act of Eliza- 
 beth in this respect has been found impracticable. 
 One other remark may be made on the poor 
 rate. The poor rate, being the earliest rate for 
 which a systematic levy was made, has become 
 the model of all other local rates ; and all other 
 local rates are either raised as parts of the poor 
 
 * Regina v. Lumsdaine, 1839, reported in 10 Adolphus & Ellis, 
 p. 157. 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 41 
 
 rate, or they are levied on the same persons and 
 in respect of the same property as the poor rate. 
 With this brief glance at the authorities to 
 whom the duty of levying and administering a 
 rate was intrusted, and the persons on whom it 
 was to be levied, we come next to the class of 
 persons for whose relief it was intended. It was, 
 says Sir G. Nicholls, 
 
 (1) " For setting to work the children of all whose parents 
 shall not be thought able to keep and maintain them." 
 
 (2) " For setting to work all such persons married and un- 
 married having no means to maintain them, and who use no 
 ordinary and daily trade of life to get their living by." 
 
 (3) " For providing a convenient stock of flax, hemp, wool, 
 thread, iron and other ware and stuff to set the poor on work." 
 
 (4) "For the necessary relief of the lame, impotent, old, 
 blind, and such other among them being poor and not able to 
 work." 
 
 The apprenticeship of destitute children, the \ 
 relief of the impotent, and the setting to ] 
 work of those who use no daily or ordinary I 
 trade, these w r ere the objects of the Act. 
 
 The two first objects call for no special 
 remark at present. The point on which the Act 
 finally broke down was the "setting to work of 
 those who use no trade," or, if we adopt the 
 view of those who accept the plenary inspiration 
 of the Elizabethan lawgiver, it broke down be- 
 cause of the neglect of the local administrators 
 
42 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 to adhere strictly to the terms of this section 
 of the Act. 
 
 It is pointed out that the phrase, " persons who 
 use no ordinary and daily trade of life," expressly 
 excludes those who were afterwards termed "the 
 industrious poor " that is, such persons as do use 
 an ordinary and daily trade, but whose earnings 
 at this trade may be inconsiderable. Before long 
 the neglect of this distinction gave rise to the 
 giving of relief in aid of wages to the able-bodied 
 labourer, while he was able-bodied and in full 
 work. This evil, once begun, was hurried on 
 apace, both because of the pressure of the poor, 
 who are naturally not prescient as to the effect 
 of a system of relief which ministers to their 
 immediate wants, and also because the system 
 enlisted in its favour the sinister support of 
 employers who were not above making a corrupt 
 use of a fund from which could be paid a part 
 of their wages bill. This, and all the evil con- 
 sequences which we shall presently describe, 
 might, it is said, have been prevented if the 
 Act had been strictly interpreted, but I have found 
 no evidence that this strict interpretation was 
 ever put forward. On the contrary, there is 
 much evidence to show that these safeguards, 
 if safeguards they were, were never operative. 
 
 One other comment must be made on the terms 
 
.] THE OLD POOR LAW 43 
 
 of the Act, as to the " providing of a convenient 
 stock" to set the poor on work. Industry 
 Ypursued under such conditions was not, and never 
 could be, successful as industry. This was never 
 realised and indeed I do not know that it is fully 
 realised now by local administrators. Fuller 
 experience has shown that the only good purpose 
 served " by setting the poor on work " by a 
 Poor Law authority is to institute a test of destitu- 
 tion. The project was much debated in the time 
 of Defoe, who, with his usual common sense, 
 pointed out the weak spot in the policy of 
 attempting to set the poor on work, as a 
 device for promoting industry. 
 
 In his Giving' Alms no Charity, 1702, 
 there is an admirable account of how the 
 Flemings, driven out of their own country by the 
 tyranny of Alva, came and founded a great 
 industry in England. They taught our people 
 a new industry, and the wealth of the country 
 was greatly increased, but, says our author, what 
 is now proposed is not to teach a new industry. 
 If those gentlemen (promoters of a bill to encour- 
 age poor law industries) could obtain an order 
 from the Czar of Muscovy that all his subjects 
 should wear stockings who wore none before, 
 it would be a great gain. 
 
 "If they will employ the poor in some manufacture 
 
44 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 which was not made in England before, or not bought with 
 some manufacture made here before, then they offer at some- 
 thing extraordinary. 
 
 " But to set poor people at work on the same thing which 
 other poor people were employed on before, and, at the same 
 time, not increase the consumption, is giving to one what you 
 take away from another, enriching one poor man to starve 
 another, putting a vagabond into an honest man's employment, 
 and putting his diligence on tenter-hooks to find out some 
 other work to maintain his family."* 
 
 The classical instance of the failure of this 
 policy was at Bristol, where, under a local Act, a 
 workhouse was built and a stock purchased to set 
 the poor on work, " with great loss to the Cor- 
 poration." The good craftsmen would not 
 remain in the house, and the class that remained 
 spoiled the material. Finally the Corporation 
 "set projects of labour aside," and farmed out 
 their poor to a contractor. This, presumably, 
 they found cheaper, even though they had to 
 pay relief over and above the wages which the 
 contractor paid to his pauper labourers. 
 
 The fact is, that it is not possible for the Poor 
 Law to organise industry in the way that this 
 clause of the Act has been thought to order. 
 To use labour as a test of destitution, more 
 especially when combined with the confinement 
 
 * Defoe's Giving Alms no Charity, reprint in Charity Organisa- 
 tion Review for May 1893. 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 45 
 
 and discipline of a workhouse, has been found a 
 useful expedient, but the setting of the poor to 
 work in the expectation that this would be profit- 
 ^able, and that healthy industries could in this way 
 jbe promoted, is a delusion, and very much for the 
 reasons indicated in the Bristol experiment. 
 If a profitable trade can be done, it will be done 
 outside. The competent craftsmen will be 
 employed there, and the Poor Law authority will 
 be left with the incompetent ; and it is cheaper 
 to maintain the destitute of this class with a safe- 
 guard in the form of some simple task-work, than 
 to allow them to waste material by pretending to 
 carry on an industry. Experience of this difficulty, 
 pointed out prophetically by Defoe, has induced 
 authorities generally to neglect the setting of the 
 poor on work as being really an impossible and 
 extravagant policy. 
 
 This Bristol experiment was begun in 1698, 
 and a good many similar experiments were made 
 under local acts, and also under a statute of 1722, 
 which authorised the building of workhouses. 
 They were temporarily successful in checking the 
 increase of pauperism, just as far as they were 
 used as tests of destitution. This condition, 
 however, was rarely in the mind of the adminis- 
 trator, and we learn from Sir F. Eden, 
 who wrote at the end of the eighteenth century, 
 
46 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 that the experiment had been adjudged a 
 failure. 
 
 The object of the comment just made on the 
 terms of the Act of Elizabeth is to suggest that 
 there need be no ground for surprise that the 
 system did not work satisfactorily. It is usual 
 to say that the Elizabethan Poor Law worked 
 well till the time of the great French war, and 
 the authorisation of bread scales, i.e. the regular 
 supplementation of wages, authorised by the 
 justices in the last decade of the eighteenth century. 
 I have indicated, however, certain a priori reasons 
 for thinking that, if this is correct, it would have 
 been contrary to expectation. I do not think, 
 moreover, that it will be difficult to show that it 
 is contrary to fact. 
 
 That the law never worked smoothly, can 
 be very certainly traced through the preambles 
 of many Acts of Parliament. 
 
 The Act of Elizabeth was, we suggest, got 
 into full operation by the time of the Settlement 
 Act of 1662. Poor people were then pressing 
 into parishes where there was good stock that 
 is, good employment for them causing a fear 
 to the parish that they might one day have to 
 be maintained. This beneficent economic move- 
 ment threatened to upset the whole policy of 
 the Poor Law, and the remedy devised was to 
 
.] THE OLD POOR LAW 47 
 
 prevent them moving. Then, in 1670, we have 
 an Act authorising workhouses in London to 
 facilitate the policy of setting the poor to work, 
 which, under the Act of Elizabeth, was altogether 
 impracticable. Then, in 1685, in the i James II. r 
 c. 17, after a recital that the poor at their first 
 coming into a parish do commonly conceal them- 
 selves, it is ordered that poor people so migrating 
 must give notice to the overseers, and the forty 
 days required for settlement are to be computed 
 from the date of notice. Six years later (by 3 
 and 4 William & Mary, c. 1 1, 1691), it is ordered 
 that this notice must be read in the church. 
 The same Act recites that the overseers in 
 their unlimited power have put a great many 
 persons on collection on frivolous pretences and 
 for their own private ends, and then enacts that 
 lists are to be made out and produced to the 
 parishioners met in vestry, and that no one else 
 was to be put on collection without the order 
 of the justices. 
 
 The Act, in fact, was intended to check the 
 corrupt profusion of the overseers, and the 
 8 & 9 William III. c. 30 is in the same sense. 
 This check seems, however, to have been no 
 check, for in the 9 George I. c. 7, 1722, it is 
 recited that the justices have abused the power 
 granted them, and, far from checking the pro- 
 
48 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 fusion of the overseers, have themselves been 
 granting relief on frivolous pretences. It is 
 then enacted that no justice is to order relief 
 until the pauper has made oath that he has 
 applied to, and been refused by, the overseers, 
 and till the overseers have had an opportunity 
 of explaining. The Act is designed, in fact, to 
 support the overseer, as the representative of 
 the rate-payer, against the justices. This same 
 Act authorises the building of workhouses, and 
 makes the offer of relief therein a valid answer 
 to a demand for relief. 
 
 Sixty years later, the 22 George III. c. 83 
 (Gilbert's Act) seems to indicate that the pen- 
 dulum of public opinion had swung back ; the 
 overseers are blamed for their brutality, and the 
 need of some higher control is declared. The 
 Act, which is permissive, provides for the appoint- 
 ment of a board of guardians to control the 
 overseers. Then with regard to the setting of 
 the poor to work, the Act contains the remarkable 
 provision, that persons willing to work, but unable 
 to find an employer, were not to go to a poor- 
 house, where a labour test might be applied, 
 but the guardians were to find work for them 
 suitable to their capacity, or " to agree for their 
 labour," in the parish and near to the place of 
 their residence. The class for whom such a 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 49 
 
 *- 
 
 guarantee was enacted were absolved from all 
 economic responsibility. 
 
 (This authority of the justices to set aside the 
 decision of the overseers was extended and made 
 universal in later Acts. Justices were authorised 
 to order relief practically at will, and it is alleged 
 that they made a very injudicious use of this 
 authority. One or two such justices in a district 
 were sufficient to involve whole parishes in con- 
 fusion. The 36 George III. c. 23, 1796, repealed 
 the provisions of 9 George I. c. 7, in respect of 
 the workhouse test, and justices were authorised 
 to order relief at the pauper's own home. This 
 power was, in 1815, further extended by 55 
 George III. c. 137. 
 
 But perhaps the strongest evidence that 
 the Act of Elizabeth was an unworkable law is 
 to be found in the fact, that almost every con- 
 siderable centre of population had deemed it 
 necessary to have recourse to a local Act. 
 
 The local Act of Bristol, already mentioned, 
 recites " the experience that the poor in the 
 city of Bristol do daily multiply, and idleness 
 and debauchery among the meaner sort doth 
 greatly increase," and goes on to authorise 
 workhouses for the better employing and main- 
 taining of the poor. Many similar Acts, some 
 
 D 
 
50 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 of them containing this identical recital, were 
 passed for other towns. 
 
 Even in the country, resort was had to Acts 
 of Incorporation. This was specially the case in 
 the Eastern Counties, In 1782, Gilbert's Act 
 was passed, that is, an Act which permitted 
 parishes to incorporate themselves without a 
 special Act, and to introduce some sort of public 
 control of the overseers. Sturges Bourne's Act, 
 1819, and Hobhouse's Act, 1831, authorised 
 the election of Select Vestries to control the 
 overseers. In 1834, there were found to be 
 975 parishes under Gilbert's Act, and, in the 
 period 1795-1834 alone, over 200 local acts 
 were introduced. 
 
 In fact, all sorts of devices had been em- 
 ployed to reform the Act of Elizabeth, but no 
 general legislation had been passed. Each 
 locality did what it could to protect itself, but 
 the general result cannot be said to have been 
 very satisfactory. By a curious omission in 
 the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, adequate 
 powers were not given to the Poor Law Com- 
 missioners to bring parishes which enjoyed local 
 Acts or were incorporated under Gilbert's Act 
 within the complete control of the Amendment 
 Act. These partial and incomplete local amend- 
 ments, in so far as they exempted the districts 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 51 
 
 in question from the benefit of the more complete 
 Amendment Act of 1834, proved in a later 
 generation one of the most serious obstacles 
 to reform. 
 
 These considerations are, I think, sufficient 
 to show that in the opinion of all concerned, the 
 legislation of Elizabeth did not work well. The 
 pressure of the poor on the poor rate tended to 
 grow with only occasional interruption, and the 
 attempts of the legislature to control it were very 
 little successful. 
 
 From the point of view of the poor man, 
 a disability had been fastened on him and his 
 class, which, if enforced, was most detrimental 
 to his interests. To be confined to his place 
 of settlement, to be liable to be sent back, if he 
 emigrated to a place where there was better 
 "stock," was a most cruel imprisonment. 
 
 It will be remembered that Adam Smith 
 declared that there was no labouring man of 
 middle age in England who had not been 
 grievously injured by this ill-contrived law of 
 settlement. So monstrous a law, however, could 
 not be, and I expect was not, very fully carried 
 out. Sir F. Eden has expressed this opinion, 
 and it is recorded elsewhere that the humane 
 magistrate would not lend himself to - this 
 tyranny. The law, however, was on the 
 
52 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 statute book, and universal evasion was not 
 possible. The point, however, is of little 
 importance, because, unfortunately, the adscrip- 
 tion of the labourer to the soil was attained by 
 a much more certain and insidious method. 
 
 By the Act of 35 George III. c. 101 (1795), 
 no poor person could be removed till he became 
 chargeable. He was now free to migrate as 
 he pleased, but it was found that the confine- 
 ment of the population to the parish of their 
 settlement still continued. They had been 
 taught by the law that, if they remained in their 
 place of settlement, following their primitive 
 unskilled occupations, the overseer was bound 
 to find them labour, suitable to their capacity, 
 near their own place of residence. 
 
 The result, which Adam Smith rightly 
 declared to have been most detrimental to the 
 best interests of the poor, had been attained not 
 by exterior force, but by a system which, through 
 a long course of mismanagement, had destroyed 
 all initiative and sense of responsibility in the 
 poor. There was no need to force them to 
 remain : they had no wish or interest to move. 
 The state of affairs which had actually arisen 
 can perhaps be made clearer by an instance. 
 
 Bledlow is a parish in Buckinghamshire. At 
 the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act 
 
n.] THE OLD POOR LAW ,53 
 
 the assistant Commissioner was sent there to 
 advise the local administrative. He found the 
 whole management in confusion, men lying about 
 on the roads, or poaching in the woods. Rob- 
 beries had taken place, the overseer's ploughs 
 and farm implements had been maliciously broken 
 up, and a bullet had been fired into his house. 
 At Tring, fifteen miles distant, there was work 
 for the able-bodied on the railway, but, despite 
 all the efforts of the parish authorities, not a 
 man would go. Instead, they went to the over- 
 seer and received relief. The assistant Com- 
 missioner met them, and asked if they were 
 willing to work. They said they had already 
 worked on the road that is, they had lain under 
 the hedges. They would not, they said, work 
 out of the parish, but they were willing to work 
 in the parish. The Commissioner goes on to 
 tell of his efforts to restore the circulation of 
 labour, which had been so disastrously inter- 
 rupted by the operation of the Poor Law. 
 Finally, homes in the North were found for a 
 number of these poor people, and with great 
 effort a few were induced to move to a place 
 where, to use the phrase of the old Act, " there 
 was good stock for them." 
 
 By this guarantee of Poor Law maintenance 
 destroying in his breast all desire to move, not 
 
54 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 only was the labourer bound to the soil, but 
 he was actually rendered incompetent, unwill- 
 ing to work, and useless within the parish of 
 his settlement. The policy and practice of the 
 Poor Law authorities had been to make the re- 
 ward of the good and the bad labourer exactly 
 the same. If a man did not receive for his 
 labour the sum that was supposed to be necessary 
 for his maintenance, he received the deficiency 
 from the parish. He had no object to be a 
 good workman. The less he earned, the larger 
 was the gratuity given to him. This arrange- 
 ment suited, or seemed to suit, the interests of 
 the employer, whose wage-bill was thus in part 
 paid by the public authority. The deterioration 
 of the employer and the labourer went hand 
 in hand. 
 
 If proof were necessary to show that this 
 congestion was entirely the result of our vicious 
 Poor Law, we may remark, in anticipation of 
 the fuller treatment of the subject given in the 
 next chapter, that, with the abolition of the 
 guarantee of work and maintenance for the 
 able-bodied, which was the operative reform of 
 the Poor Law Amendment Act, these evil con- 
 ditions began at once to disappear. The con- 
 ditions of trade required that men should leave 
 their parishes in search of work. After a long 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 55 
 
 period of stagnation the circulation of labour 
 was again set in motion, and it became an 
 object with men to prove themselves good 
 workmen. It then became easy for employers 
 to employ men who now had some interest 
 and pride in making their labour efficient. 
 
 I make no concealment, therefore, of my 
 opinion that the 43 Elizabeth c. 2 was an ill- 
 conceived measure, and it is worth while to 
 summarise the several points at which it has 
 proved specially inept. 
 
 I. The officers appointed by the law were, 
 from the first, unequal to the task. The 
 maladministration of the overseers had to be 
 corrected by the jus_tices, and the justices, in 
 their turn, introdjjced evils of their own devising. 
 Vestries and local Acts and other expedients were 
 introduced, but without much success. So it 
 went on till what we may call the judgment 
 day the day when the whole business was in- 
 quired into by the famous Commission of 18.34. 
 In its report every single person or body that 
 had been charged with administration of the 
 Poor Law was tried and found wanting. 
 
 II. The order to rate personally for local 
 purposes was so impossible, that practically no 
 general attempt was ever made to enforce it. 
 
 III. The difference of policy to be pursued 
 
56 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 with regard to those who use an ordinary and 
 daily trade, and those who do not, was so vaguely 
 stated that it seems to have been generally over- 
 looked, and the fact leaves us in doubt, whether 
 the grave economic consequences which turned 
 on this distinction were ever clearly present in 
 the mind of the legislator. 
 
 IV. The policy of setting the poor on work, 
 so forcibly condemned by Defoe, and so fre- 
 quently tried and found costly and inefficient at 
 Bristol and elsewhere, all experience has shown 
 to be an impossible policy. 
 
 V. Further, the conception which underlies 
 the whole Act, the right of the poor to a statutory 
 maintenance, rendered necessary some plan of 
 indicating where and by whom each applicant 
 had to be relieved. This necessity resulted in 
 making permanent the adscription of the labourer 
 to the soil, a condition of things so opposed to 
 the strong forces of economic progress that it 
 would probably have been swept aside, had 
 not the insidious guarantee of Poor Law main- 
 tenance paralysed motives of self-assertion which 
 express enactment could not subdue. 
 
 VI. It remains to be shown how ineffectual 
 was the Old Poor Law as a means of relieving 
 the impotent, the sick, and the infirm. 
 
 -^ Generally it may be said that the whole 
 
ir.] THE OLD POOR LAW 57 
 
 administration of the Poor Law had been broken 
 down by reason of the large responsibility which 
 the law_Jhjid^ssjmieji_Jbr the able-bodied and 
 indusjrious poor. The care of the aged, sick, 
 impotent and infirm was largely neglected. All 
 the energies and thought of the administrator were 
 turned to meeting the ever-accumulating pressure 
 of able-bodied pauperism, and expended in en- 
 deavours to stave off the bankruptcy of his 
 parish. This state of things, the logical and 
 inevitable result of the ordinarily received in- 
 terpretation of the Act of Elizabeth, will be 
 better understood by a few concrete examples, 
 taken for the most part from the Report of the 
 Commissioners of Inquiry. 
 
 The policy of giving relief to all poor men 
 in addition to their earnings in the south of 
 England, became almost universal at the end 
 of last century. This plan was systematised 
 by the publication of what were called "Bread 
 Scales." To quote the heading of one of the 
 most famous of these " Bread Scales " 
 
 " This shows at one view what would be the weekly income 
 of the industrious poor, as settled by the magistrates for the 
 County of Berks, at a meeting held at Speenhamland, 6th 
 May 1795." 
 
 The Table systematically sets out what the 
 income of a man with one, two, and up to seven 
 
58 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 children should be when the gallon loaf is at 
 such and such a price. 
 
 If the man did not earn this amount, and 
 he had no object in so doing, while it was very 
 much to the interest of his employer that he 
 should not earn it, the parish had to make up 
 the deficiency. The usual phrase in the mouth 
 of the pauper was, " my money " (meaning the 
 money indicated in the "Bread Scale") "is so 
 and so it does not matter to me how I get it ; the 
 less work done for it the better." Besides the 
 money given for deficiency of earnings, is. or 
 is. 6d. extra was given for each child. Un- 
 married men and men with small families were 
 told they might shift for themselves, for the 
 farmer argued that it was cheaper to employ 
 the family man, who was partly supported by 
 the rate-payers. The system was a most 
 ingenious premium on improvident marriage, 
 and, what was equally unfair, a distinct penalty 
 on unmarried men and men with small families. 
 
 Five different systems are enumerated under 
 which the able-bodied man was given the benefit 
 of the Act of Elizabeth, as that Act was inter- 
 preted by the local administrator. 
 
 I. RELIEF WITHOUT LABOUR, either by way of 
 test or by way of industry. 
 
 (a) The labourer was given the smallest sum 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 59 
 
 possible, and told to shift for himself 
 and give no more trouble. 
 
 (b] Oftener he was called on to give up 
 
 some of his time by standing in the 
 pound or in a gravel pit, or by attend- 
 ing a roll call. 
 
 (c) Or relief was given because the labourer 
 
 was said to have lost time, by reason 
 of weather, or caprice of private em- 
 ployer. 
 
 II. ALLOWANCE SYSTEM. Relief was paid in 
 aid of wages, and on account of number of 
 children, as provided in the local "Bread Scale." 
 
 III. ROUNDSMAN SYSTEM. By this plan the 
 parish became in the first instance the universal 
 employer, and hired out the labourers to the 
 farmers, the parish agreeing to make up the 
 difference between the scale and the wages paid. 
 The labourers were let out by auction, and 
 sometimes by ballot, or perhaps by both ex- 
 pedients. There would be some bids for the 
 labourer who was fairly tractable and sober, 
 while the hopeless and incorrigibly bad work- 
 man was disposed of by lot. He was worse 
 than useless to his employer, but by the aid of 
 the parish allowance he received the same reward 
 as the industrious competent workman. 
 
 IV. PARISH WORK. The parish authorities set 
 
60 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 to work on the roads the so-called surplus labour. 
 Superintendence, however, was very slack, and 
 the condition of the pauper was often much 
 better than that of the independent labourer. 
 There was, moreover, no profit to any one in 
 particular, and the farmers preferred the more 
 corrupt allowance system. The Poor Law, by 
 rendering an equitable bargain between employer 
 and employed impossible, had created a surplus 
 or unemployed population, and required to deal 
 with it by inventing these fictitious and un- 
 economic employments. Yet there was, as we 
 shall presently see, more or less full employment 
 available for the whole population in the current 
 channels of industry. 
 
 V. LABOUR RATE. Inhabitants were obliged 
 to employ a certain number of men in proportion 
 to their rating, the number of acres in their 
 holding, or some other never satisfactory scale. 
 Thus, the parson was often the highest rate-payer, 
 yet he was not as a rule a farmer able to employ 
 many labourers. 
 
 By these and other expedients the whole able- 
 bodied population was swept into the vortex of 
 pauperism. Certainly and surely every vestige 
 of self-respect was being obliterated. 
 
 The economic result was, as already stated, 
 
.] THE OLD POOR LAW 61 
 
 to confine the able-bodied population to their 
 parishes and to a helpless immobility of character, 
 in order that they might enjoy the benefit of the 
 Act of Elizabeth, and be employed under one 
 or other of these types of pauper servitude. 
 
 The summary of the Commissioners on this 
 economic aspect is as follows : 
 
 "Piece-work is thus refused to the single man, or to the 
 married man if he have no family, because they can exist on 
 day wages ; it is refused to the active and intelligent labourer 
 because he would earn too much. The enterprising man who 
 has fled from the tyranny of his parish to some place where 
 there is a demand and a reward for his services, is driven from 
 a situation which suits him, and an employer to whom he is 
 attached, by a labour rate, or some other device against non- 
 parishioners, and forced back to his settlement to receive as 
 alms a portion only of what he was obtaining by his own 
 exertions. He is driven from a place where he was earning, 
 as a free labourer, 125. or 143. a week, and is offered road 
 work, as a pauper, at 6d. a day, or perhaps to be put up by 
 the parish authorities to auction and sold to the farmer who 
 will take him at the lowest allowance. Can we wonder if the 
 labourer abandons virtues of which this is the reward ? " 
 
 "Can we wonder," it goes on, "if he abandons economy, 
 diligence and prudence, or if he regards the law as his 
 enemy ? " 
 
 The immoral and anti-social characteristics 
 which the system developed in all classes were 
 hardly less remarkable. 
 
 Population always seeks to expand along the 
 line of least resistance, and in this country, during 
 
62 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 that evil time, the maintenance to be acquired 
 with least effort by the poorer classes was main- 
 tenance from the parish. Let us note one or 
 two of the characteristic qualifications for relief 
 which were promoted and encouraged by the 
 endowment derived from the poor rate. 
 
 The case of a woman with an illegitimate child 
 was a hard one, and an allowance from the rates, 
 generally 2s. 6d. a week for each such child, was 
 ordered (a larger sum than was given for the 
 legitimate child). The result of this well-meant, 
 but ill-considered philanthropy was that a trade 
 was made in illegitimacy, and a woman with a 
 long row of illegitimate children was sought in 
 marriage because she brought to her husband a 
 valuable dowry. So notorious was the fact, that 
 I find this revolting practice made the subject of 
 denunciation by a parish clergyman in a remote 
 country village. 
 
 Another abominable abuse was the pauper 
 marriages corruptly promoted by overseers with 
 the view of shifting the settlement of paupers 
 from one parish to another. Some wretched 
 man was given a sum of money to marry some 
 still more wretched woman. The details of the 
 bargain were sometimes debated even on the 
 altar-steps. This chicanery and other disputes 
 about settlement led to what one of the Com- 
 
.] THE OLD POOR LAW 63 
 
 missioners has happily called a dirty warfare, 
 continually waged between upwards of fifteen 
 thousand parishes, all trying to shuffle off their 
 responsibility, and willing to resort at times to 
 the meanest stratagems. 
 
 Not only was the Poor Law used to build up 
 a spurious and bestial imitation of domestic life, 
 but it also tended to destroy and corrupt the 
 domestic affections and graces which are to be 
 found even among the most savage or uncivilised 
 of men. 
 
 Here is a passage from the Commissioners' 
 report : 
 
 " The worst results are still to be mentioned ; in all ranks 
 of society the great sources of happiness and virtue are the 
 domestic affections, and this is particularly the case among 
 those who have so few resources as the labouring classes. 
 Now, pauperism seems to be an engine for the purpose of 
 disconnecting each member of a family from all others; of 
 reducing all to the state of domesticated animals, fed, lodged, 
 and provided for by the parish, without mutual dependence or 
 mutual interest. Mothers and children will not nurse one 
 another in sickness, unless their services are paid for. Boys 
 of 14 when they become entitled to receive parish relief on 
 their own account, no longer make a common fund of their 
 income with their parents. They board with their parents, but 
 buy their own loaf and bacon, and devour it alone. Disgraceful 
 quarrels arise within the family circle from mutual accusations 
 of theft." 
 
 "At the time of my journey," says Mr Cowell, one of 
 the assistant Commissioners, "the acquaintance I had with 
 the practical operation of the Poor Laws led me to suppose 
 
64 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 that the pressure of the sum annually raised upon the rate- 
 payers, and its progressive increase, constituted the main 
 inconvenience of the Poor Law system. \The experience of 
 a very few weeks served to convince me that this evil, however 
 great, sinks into insignificance when compared with the 
 dreadful effects which the system produces on the morals 
 and happiness of the lower orders^] It is as difficult to 
 convey to the mind of the reader a true and faithful impression 
 of the intensity and malignancy of the evil in this point 
 of view as it is by any description, however vivid, to give 
 an adequate idea of the horrors of a shipwreck or a pestilence. 
 A person must converse with paupers, must enter workhouses 
 and examine the inmates, must attend at the parish pay-table 
 before he can form a just conception of the moral debasement 
 which is the offspring of the present system ; he must hear 
 the pauper threatening to abandon his wife and family unless 
 more money is allowed him, threaten to abandon an aged 
 bed-ridden mother, to turn her out of his house, and lay 
 her down at the overseer's door, unless he is paid for giving 
 her shelter; he must hear parents threatening to follow 
 the same course with regard to their sick children; he must 
 see mothers coming to receive the reward of their daughters' 
 ignominy, and witness women in cottages quietly pointing out, 
 without even the question being asked, which are their children 
 by their husband and which by other men previous to marriage ; 
 and when he finds he can scarcely step into a town or parish 
 in any county without meeting with some instance or other 
 of this character, he will no longer consider the pecuniary 
 pressure on the rate-payer as the first in the class of evils 
 which the Poor Laws have entailed upon the community." 
 
 Two more quotations may be allowed, in- 
 volving a contrast between the pauper and the 
 independent labourer and also between the 
 able-bodied pauper and a poor lunatic. They 
 
ii.] THE OLD POOR LAW 65 
 
 illustrate what we fear is an universal tendency. 
 The benefit of a common fund or property, 
 such as is the poor rate, does not go to the 
 weak but to the importunate and strong. 
 
 The law, as we saw, required that work should 
 be found at the pauper's own door. Accordingly, 
 near a certain house of industry, a brick work 
 was set up for the employment of the pauper 
 inmates, but the pauper labour locally available 
 was not sufficient for the effective conduct 
 of the industry, and it was thought desirable 
 to hire men from a distance. The assistant 
 Commissioner describes how, 
 
 "these hard-working honest men walked four miles to their 
 work each morning, worked hard all day, lived upon coarse 
 fare, drinking water, and walking home at evening to their 
 families, whilst the lazy able-bodied paupers lived on the 
 spot, had good hot meat dinners, five pints of strong beer 
 daily, and is. per week to spend on Sunday." 
 
 In another parish he describes how he dis- 
 covered in a so-called workhouse, 
 
 " a most dismal, filthy-looking room, a coal cellar rather than 
 the residence of a human being the sole tenant ... a poor 
 distressed lunatic. His appearance was pitiable in the extreme ; 
 his clothing was extremely ragged, his face as dirty as the 
 floor, his head and face bruised. He sat listless and alone, 
 without any human being to attend upon or take care of him. 
 . . . To the very great shame of the parish officers, I found 
 he had been in this disgusting state for years," 
 
 E 
 
66 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 In some of the so-called houses of industry 
 pauper families had taken more or less forcible 
 possession of the rooms. When they went 
 harvesting they nailed up their door. Their 
 children were born and brought up in these 
 abodes, and presently went off and returned 
 with wives and families of their own. Three 
 generations of two such families were found 
 in one Suffolk house of industry. 
 
 The people, in a sense, lived very well in the 
 workhouses that is, the strong and disorderly 
 did ; but there was no classification, and no 
 attempt to deal adequately with the impotent and 
 the sick. The workhouse of Oxford was not an 
 object of terror but of desire, and interest was 
 made to get quarters in it. There was no confine- 
 ment and no discipline. One guardian with a 
 desire for popularity went round countermanding 
 directions of another, and ordering drinks for 
 the paupers. One-sixth of the population in 
 this workhouse were women with illegitimate 
 children ; in fact, the place was a pandemonium 
 of the worst characters, and a most uncomfortable 
 refuge for the impotent and the sick. 
 
 Illustrations of this kind might be indefinitely 
 multiplied, but enough has been said to indicate 
 how legislation, framed with the laudable desire 
 of relieving the impotent and persons who had 
 
i,.] THE OLD POOR LAW 67 
 
 no work, brought about results of an unexpected 
 character. Part of the failure was inevitable, 
 part was preventable. The fact of the failure is 
 beyond dispute. 
 
 A population just emerging from a condition 
 of feudal servitude was thought to be the proper 
 object of a system of relief. In order to 
 administer this relief, some continuance of the 
 system of the old territorial settlement was 
 necessary. The express regulations enforcing 
 this confinement might have been evaded, but 
 the will and inclination of the poor man towards 
 economic movement, towards the better dis- 
 tribution of his services in the labour market, 
 towards the modification of labour aptitudes 
 required by the changing conditions of industry, 
 were atrophied and destroyed by the guarantee 
 of maintenance held out to him if he resolutely 
 adhered to an attitude of economic immobility 
 and incompetence. 
 
 Not even the object of adequate and humane 
 relief was attained, the weak and impotent were 
 thrust aside, parishes were unable to meet the 
 demand created by this vicious state of things, 
 and, as at Cholesbury, land no longer able to 
 bear the burden of the rate was allowed to 
 go out of cultivation. 
 
 Not only was the country carrying a vast mass 
 
68 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. n. 
 
 of labour unprofitably employed under the futile 
 and sterile direction of the parochial authority, 
 and maintaining large numbers of destitute people 
 burdens from which no civilised community can 
 perhaps be entirely free but its methods of 
 dealing with this class had been so faulty, that 
 the insolvent portion of the community was 
 gaining on the solvent portion, and was fast 
 hurrying the whole into a common ruin. 
 
 This was the state of things when, in 1834, 
 after an elaborate inquiry, Lord Grey's Govern- 
 ment in the first reformed House of Commons 
 brought in and passed the Poor Law Amend- 
 ment Act, 1834, a subject with which we must 
 deal in our next chapter. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE POOR LAW AMENDMENT ACT OF 1834, 
 COMMONLY CALLED " THE NEW POOR LAW " 
 
 IN the last chapter I endeavoured to draw a 
 picture of the social economy of the poorer 
 classes in England, as it was affected by the 
 administration of the Old Poor Law. The effect 
 of the Old Poor Law on English social life is 
 an object lesson, on the largest and most 
 impressive scale, of the terrible evils which 
 legislation can produce, if, as in this case, it runs 
 counter to the essential principles of economic 
 progress. The administration of the Old Poor 
 Law ignored altogether that concurrent and better 
 mechanism of society of which Dr Chalmers 
 spoke. In its view the economy of the poorer 
 class was a thing incapable of wholesome 
 economic development ; it was, on the contrary, a 
 thing to be " managed " and controlled at every 
 turn by Parochial Providence. It is easy, no 
 doubt, to be wise after the event. We know 
 now that, whether we desire it or not, our lot 
 is cast in a society which, notwithstanding the 
 
70 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 strong retentive forces of the primitive static 
 conception of life, has irrevocably elected to live 
 by the aid of a sub-division of labour, and the 
 exchange of mutual service. 
 
 If, in such an organisation, labour is to attain 
 the high position which true philanthropy desires 
 to secure for it, it is absolutely necessary that 
 men's aptitudes for service shall be cultivated, 
 improved, and taken with the utmost rapidity to 
 their best market. Such an organisation becomes 
 one in which there lies on each unit a direct 
 responsibility to bring his or her services to 
 market in a high degree of efficiency. It is the 
 cumulative effect of such individual improvements 
 that makes a day's work, at the beginning of the 
 twentieth century, productive of so much more 
 magnificent a harvest than a similar day's work 
 among a primitive people. The functions per- 
 formed by capital in this organisation are 
 exchangeable services. They require the same 
 freedom of movement for their most successful 
 development, and they conduce to the same 
 beneficent result. The institution of capital 
 is condemned by anti-social * writers, not, I 
 
 * There is, we submit, much mental confusion in applying to 
 persons who wish to subject Society to the State (the modern 
 representation of the condition called by Maine, Status) the term 
 " Socialists." They are in French phraseology ttatiste, not socialiste, 
 or, as designated in the text, anti-social. 
 
HI.] THE NEW POOR LAW 71 
 
 apprehend, because we can dispense with it, but 
 because being concentrated in comparatively few 
 hands it has given rise to inequality. 
 
 The remedy for this is not to be found in 
 impracticable proposals for a common tenure of 
 capital. The evil to be deplored and to be 
 amended is the resolute proletariate habit, char- 
 acteristically adopted by certain classes, which 
 effectually prevents them from acquiring property, 
 and, what is perhaps equally important, from 
 acquiring the instincts of property. This we 
 assert is due to the permanence of the static 
 organisation of life, of which the Poor Law is in 
 England the most important survival. Be this, 
 however, as it may, we are convinced that it 
 is quite impossible for society to go back perma- 
 nently to any conceivable form of communism, 
 such as that implied in the "taking over" of all 
 industrial capital by the state. No true line 
 of deliverance lies in that direction.* The con- 
 
 * During the lectures of which the text is a substantial reproduc- 
 tion, it was suggested to the lecturer by one of his audience, that 
 the sufferings of the poor were due to the break-up of the feudal 
 system and to the inequitable partition of the property of the old 
 feudal community. This view has its plausible side, and seems 
 to suggest that the remedy must consist in some return to some 
 earlier form of communistic status. The answer, I apprehend, 
 is as follows : 
 
 1. There is no evidence that the condition of the serf was 
 so favourable, that a return to it would have satisfied the require- 
 ments of the case. 
 
 2. The partition of the feudal estate, and the policy pursued 
 
72 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 current, and as we believe preferable, alternative 
 which lay before the legislator, if he could 
 have perceived it, was to allow the exodus 
 of the people from the bondage of primi- 
 tive conditions to conduct itself under the 
 guidance of what Chalmers has called, " the 
 human exchanges." Under this guidance, 
 members of a society, held together by exchange 
 of mutual service, attain an honourable self- 
 sufficient interdependence which does not 
 exclude, but rather imperatively includes, some 
 acquisition of capital by all classes, as a fitting 
 complement to the fully developed labour ap- 
 titudes of the industrial unit. If at a point 
 this purely economic organisation failed, there 
 remained a reserve of spontaneous benevo- 
 lence, inseparable from family and associated life, 
 
 subsequent to its break-up were influenced by the equity of the day 
 such as it was. The Elizabethan Poor Law was the share allotted to 
 the poor, and our main contention is that the equity of the slow 
 grinding of the economic order has proved superior to the con- 
 temporary conception of equity as represented by the substitution 
 of parochial for feudal servitude. 
 
 3. More important, however, is the consideration that the break- 
 up of feudalism, whether a good thing or a bad thing, was 
 inevitable. Human nature, when it once came to perceive the 
 advantage of what Chalmers calls the " human exchanges," will no 
 longer put up with communism. Of course, if any one thinks 
 that we can with advantage return to experiments in feudal status, 
 he is entitled to his opinion. There are survivals, such as the 
 English Poor Law, the system of caste in India, and that strange 
 institution known as the Russian Mir, but it cannot be said that 
 the results derived from them are encouraging. 
 
HI.] THE NEW POOR LAW 73 
 
 ready to come forward and bear the burden of 
 the unfortunate. This reserve of force, whether 
 fully adequate to discharge such a responsibility 
 or not, was, and is, undoubtedly, in existence, and 
 at least renders it unnecessary to erect, on an 
 obtrusive and pretentious scale, concurrently with 
 the more excellent way, and for the temptation of 
 struggling weaker brethren, offers of a dependent 
 maintenance, which, though insidiously attractive, 
 reduces its victims to an altogether lower plane of 
 existence. 
 
 All this was, we will not say denied, but 
 resolutely ignored by the Old Poor Law. The 
 message of feudalism to the poor man, if we may 
 so speak, was, " Serve here, and maintenance will 
 be forthcoming." Then the Poor Law, addressing 
 itself to the labourer emerging from this shell 
 of servitude, varied the injunction, declaring : 
 " Remain here where you are, and as you are, 
 and the parish must maintain you." This policy 
 obstructed the true exodus of the people, and 
 created a monstrous growth of population, im- 
 pervious to the distributing force of the economic 
 motive, and threatening the moral and financial 
 ruin of the nation. 
 
 The merit of the reform which we are about 
 to consider, consists in the fact that up to a 
 certain point it restored society to the influence of 
 
74 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the economic motive, which had so disastrously 
 been excluded. The demerit of the reform was, 
 in like manner, due to the fact that this restora- 
 tion was only partial and incomplete. 
 
 No apology will be needed for this somewhat 
 theoretical analysis of the principles underlying 
 our social organisation, if, as I believe, it puts us 
 in a coign of vantage from which we can survey 
 and predict the result of the many experiments 
 which, under the name of poor laws, have been 
 tried on the body politic. There is nothing, in 
 such matters, so practical as a right theory. 
 Given a right theory, the problem is half-solved, 
 even though the detailed course of conduct which 
 is required to bring reform within our reach is 
 still a difficulty. 
 
 The question was : What was to be done ? 
 
 Not unnaturally the stupendous evils of the 
 time suggested to some minds that there was 
 nothing for it but to abolish the Poor Law, 
 which seemed the source of all this mischief. 
 
 The teaching of such writers as Malthus and 
 Ricardo seemed to point in this direction. It 
 was, however, obviously futile to take up such an 
 attitude. It was clearly impossible, even if such 
 a policy was to be adopted as the ultimate goal 
 towards which we ought to strive, to lay at once 
 the monster which the legislative Frankenstein 
 
HI.) THE NEW POOR LAW 75 
 
 had created. For centuries the law had been 
 holding back in a condition of dependence a 
 population which otherwise would have been 
 absorbed in that better mechanism, and it was 
 not just nor politic to destroy its maintenance in a 
 moment, and without full consideration. 
 
 The Government very sensibly said, Let us 
 have an Inquiry, and accordingly, in 1832, they 
 appointed a Royal Commission to inquire and to 
 advise. In many respects, the work of this 
 Commission, and of the Government which acted 
 on its advice, was a great effort of statecraft. 
 
 Consider what the elements of the problem 
 were. The Reform Bill had just been passed, 
 and one of the first duties of the new Parliament, 
 elected on the wider franchise, was to sanction a 
 proposal, made by the Government, for dealing 
 in an unpopular and restrictive manner with a 
 sum of some seven or eight millions per annum, 
 which purported to be, in a sense, the property 
 of the poor, or at least to be spent in their 
 interests. It was, in fact, a very serious thing to 
 ask the new democracy to perform on itself the 
 painful surgical operation of cutting its lower 
 members off from dependence on the poor rate. 
 The situation was full of danger ; such an attempt 
 by the Liberal Government was sure to be re- 
 presented by the Tory Democrat of the day as 
 
76 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHA?. 
 
 the robbery of the poor. That it would be 
 resented by the poor themselves was also certain, 
 and the interest, as we have seen, of many 
 employers was enlisted in support of the old 
 abuses. The proper conduct of the affair re- 
 quired the greatest tact and skill. 
 
 The Commission included some eminent 
 names. The Bishop of London, Blomfield, chair- 
 man ; Sumner, Bishop of Chester, afterwards 
 Archbishop of Canterbury ; Mr Sturges Bourne ; 
 Mr Nassau Senior. In all, there were to the 
 Report nine signatories, including Mr Chadwick, 
 who at first was appointed Secretary, but during 
 the course of the inquiry was made a Commis- 
 sioner. It was a non-political body. None of 
 its members were members of the House of 
 Commons. The two men who guided the course 
 of the inquiry, and were practically responsible 
 for the Report, were Mr Nassau Senior and Mr 
 (afterwards Sir) Edwin Chadwick. 
 
 Mr Senior was a lawyer, and for many years 
 a Master in Chancery. He had been Professor 
 of Political Economy at Oxford, and was a 
 Whig, a personal friend of the Marquis of 
 Lansdowne and other members of the Govern- 
 ment. Mr Chadwick was then a young barrister, 
 a disciple and friend of Jeremy Bentham, who 
 died in this year. The literary arrangement of 
 
,.] THE NEW POOR LAW 77 
 
 the Report was the work of Mr Senior. Mr 
 Chadwick collected a vast amount of the evidence, 
 and was the author (following therein the teach- 
 ing of his old master Bentham) of many of the 
 practical details which were afterwards embodied 
 in the Act. 
 
 To give some idea of the extent of the Com- 
 mission's labour, it may be mentioned that the 
 evidence collected by their assistant Commis- 
 sioners and the Report together amount to more 
 than 8000 folio pages. 
 
 The Commissioners, in all probability, very 
 quickly came to the conclusion that it was im- 
 possible to abolish the whole law. The next 
 best thing to do was to abolish a part of the law, 
 and we should remember in reading their Report 
 that they had this limited practical object in view. 
 
 After an historical survey of the course of 
 legislation, the Commissioners proceed : 
 
 " It is now our painful duty to report that in the greater part 
 of the districts which we have been able to examine, the fund, 
 which the 43rd of Elizabeth directed to be employed in setting 
 to work children and persons capable of labour, but using no 
 daily trade, and in the necessary relief of the impotent, is ap- 
 plied to purposes opposed to the letter, and still more to the 
 spirit of that law, and destructive to the morals of the most 
 numerous class, and to the welfare of all." 
 
 This gives a keynote to the practical recom- 
 mendations of the Report. The principal object 
 
78 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 of the attack was to be the relief given in sup- 
 plementation of wages to persons who are 
 variously described as those who use an ordinary 
 or daily trade, or the industrious poor, or the 
 able-bodied poor. 
 
 We must return, so the language used seems 
 to suggest, to the wisdom of Elizabeth, and to a 
 literal interpretation of her Act. We may be 
 inclined to doubt the wisdom of the Act of 
 Elizabeth, but it was a wise stroke in advocacy 
 to impute the abuses which had occurred not 
 to the Act, but to a neglect of the terms of the 
 Act, especially when all the reform, which the 
 Commissioners thought practicable at that time, 
 was an abolition of outdoor relief to the able- 
 bodied. This object would be attained by a 
 strict interpretation of the Act of Elizabeth. 
 Such an interpretation, we may repeat, had never 
 been given to it in practice, and it was the 
 business of the Commission to suggest a plan 
 by which their own interpretation of the Act of 
 Elizabeth could be carried out. After the hint 
 thrown out above, the Report proceeds to 
 enumerate the evils of the old law, such as 
 were narrated in the last chapter. They then 
 meet by anticipation the objections likely to be 
 raised by labourers, by employers, and by land- 
 owners. They pointed out how the labourers 
 
79 
 
 clung to their relief, how the employer tried to 
 get a corrupt profit out of the system, and how 
 the owner of cottage property was able to get 
 a liberal and a certain rent from the overseer on 
 behalf of his pauper tenants. 
 
 Deep-rooted prejudices against reform were 
 to be found in the breasts of those who were 
 the victims, as well as those who were adminis- 
 trators, of the system. This leads them to 
 discuss the authorities who have hitherto striven 
 and failed to control the effect of these sinister 
 prejudices. Overseers ; Vestries, Open and 
 Select; and lastly, Magistrates, all alike are 
 shown to have been unequal to the task. The 
 case against the magistrates is laboured more 
 fully than that against the others. There seems 
 to have been a fear in the minds of the Commis- 
 sioners that proposals would be made for making 
 the magistrates a local Board of Control, and, 
 in order to get rid of a suggestion which they 
 felt to be quite inadequate, they dwell with 
 considerable detail on the maladministration of 
 the magistrates. Mr Senior afterwards admitted 
 that he thought more than their due share of 
 blame had been imputed to the magistrates. 
 They were no worse than any one else. Then, 
 before giving their own remedies, they discuss 
 certain proposals that had been made 
 
8o PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 (i) For making the maintenance of the poor 
 a national charge. In rejecting this suggestion, 
 they assume, as axiomatic, that the administra- 
 tion must still continue in the hands of local 
 amateurs. Obviously, if this was necessary, a 
 national rate to be expended by local empirics 
 was a short cut to financial ruin. It is important, 
 however, to notice that Mr Chadwick was 
 strongly in favour of a centralised administration 
 through subordinate and salaried expert officials. 
 His views were not fully accepted by his col- 
 leagues, and, as we shall presently see, his attempt 
 to give effect to his views, by means of a 
 Central Board and certain salaried local officials, 
 was frustrated to a large extent by a continuance 
 in office of local boards of guardians with authority 
 far in excess of that which Mr Chadwick wished 
 to entrust to them. 
 
 (2) They considered a proposal for promoting 
 the occupation of land by labourers. The sug- 
 gestion that new and varied forms of relief should 
 be invented in the vain hope that uneconomic 
 forms of dependence would, contrary to all past 
 experience, in some unexpected way prove salu- 
 tary, was rejected as irrelevant. The occupation 
 of land by poor men is in itself a good thing, but 
 it must be reached by ordinary economic pro- 
 cesses. When made a part of our Poor Law 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 81 
 
 procedure, it could do nothing but increase the 
 pressure of population into the pauper habit of 
 life. Occupation of land, moreover, was no 
 general or universally practicable method of 
 administering relief, and was best promoted 
 without the interference of the parish. 
 
 (3) A more lengthy consideration was given 
 to what seems now the most impracticable pro- 
 posal of all, viz. : a Labour Rate. The reason 
 for this probably was that the principle had 
 recently been embodied in a bill. To-day, the 
 suggestion that every rate-payer should employ 
 a certain number of men, altogether irrespective 
 of his requirements, seems too ridiculous for 
 discussion. Francis Place, the radical tailor 
 of Charing Cross, a democratic leader, with a 
 very real appreciation of true liberal principles, 
 thought the proposal worthy of refutation, and 
 was so much pleased with the Commissioners' 
 criticisms, that he got a large number of copies 
 printed and sent to persons who, he thought, 
 were likely to agitate in its favour. This 
 criticism was so effective that, as he tells us, 
 "no more was heard of the mischievous bill, 
 either within or without the House."* 
 
 Then the Commissioners came to their own 
 Remedial Measures. The most pressing evil 
 
 * Life of Francis Ptace, by G. Wallas, p. 331. 
 F 
 
82 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 is that in connection with the relief of the able- 
 bodied. 
 
 " If we believed," they say, " that the evils described were 
 necessarily incidental to the compulsory relief of the able-bodied, 
 we should not hesitate in recommending its entire abolition. 
 But we do not believe these evils to be its necessary conse- 
 quences. We believe that under strict regulations adequately 
 enforced, such relief may be afforded safely and even bene- 
 ficially." 
 
 The regulations, the argument continues, must 
 be directed to making the situation of the person 
 relieved, on the whole, less eligible than that of 
 the independent labourer of the lowest class. 
 They then point out that such regulation had 
 already been introduced into various districts by 
 the private initiative of the local authority, and 
 for the most part by means of the workhouse test. 
 This was done at Southwell, by Mr Nicholls, at 
 Bingham, by Mr Lowe, at Uley, by Mr Barwick 
 Baker, and at a variety of other places. 
 
 The absorption of the able-bodied pauper, 
 or rather his conversion into an independent 
 labourer, had in the places enumerated been suc- 
 cessfully carried out. 
 
 The following recommendation therefore is 
 made : 
 
 " That, except as to medical attendance, and subject to the 
 exception respecting apprenticeship hereinafter stated, all relief 
 whatever, to able-bodied persons or to their families, otherwise 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 83 
 
 than in well-regulated workhouses (i.e. places where they be 
 set to work according to the spirit and intention of the 43rd of 
 Elizabeth), shall be declared unlawful, and shall cease, in 
 manner and at periods hereafter specified ; and that all relief 
 afforded in respect of children under the age of 16 shall be 
 considered as afforded to their parents." 
 
 Relief to the able-bodied was not to be pro-"" 
 hibited, but to be given in such a way that the 
 able-bodied recipient of relief should be put in a 
 less favourable position than the independent 
 labourer, a condition, which if the relief given 
 was to be adequate, could only be secured by 
 the detention and discipline and at the same 
 time adequate maintenance of the workhouse. 
 
 The value of an automatic test is set out at 
 considerable length. The Commissioners dwell 
 very forcibly on the uselessness of investigation. 
 Such a barrier every day offers a more feeble 
 resistance to importunity. Unless there is some 
 automatic test, officers in large towns, where 
 investigation on an efficient scale is practically 
 impossible, have no alternative between indis- 
 criminately granting and indiscriminately refusing 
 relief. 
 
 The offer of relief in a well-regulated work- 
 house, on the other hand, frees the administrator 
 from this dilemma. The relief is adequate, and 
 it will not be accepted unless it is necessary. 
 With regard therefore to the responsibility of 
 
84 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 able-bodied persons and their families, the 
 Commissioners are clear that no out-door relief 
 should be given. They assume, it should here 
 be pointed out, for it becomes subsequently 
 a point of considerable importance, a somewhat 
 narrow definition of the responsibility of the able- 
 bodied man. He is responsible for himself and 
 family, while he is able-bodied, but he is not 
 responsible for his sickness, his old age, or 
 for those who are dependent on him, in the 
 event of his death. This limited definition 
 assumed by the Commissioners does very well 
 for the limited reformation at which they were 
 then aiming, but obviously it is logically quite 
 untenable. The able-bodied period of life of 
 every community must be responsible for the 
 unable-bodied period. The ideal of a free in- 
 dustrial community is that each one shall be re- 
 sponsible for his own unable period and for that 
 of those who by common consent are dependent 
 on him. The Poor Law can make (and to a certain 
 extent has made) the community responsible. 
 The evil of the Old Poor Law was that the 
 community had accepted this responsibility on a 
 scale which had led to the ruin and demoralisation 
 of those whom it sought to benefit. The Com- 
 missioners were now proposing to oblige the able- 
 bodied to resume, or, perhaps more correctly, to 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 85 
 
 take up for the first time, a part, limited as 
 above indicated, of the responsibility which, under 
 the new economic order, clearly belonged to the 
 individual. The change was effected, not by 
 an absolute refusal of relief, but by means of the 
 "workhouse test." The question, which to-day 
 is, or, if people took any interest in the matter, 
 ought to be, a practical one, is : Why apply the 
 strict test of destitution solely to what we may 
 call man's major responsibility, i.e. his own able- 
 bodied period of life, and refuse to apply it to 
 his minor responsibilities, viz., his old age, his 
 sickness, and the similar periods of disability in 
 those dependent on him ? 
 
 If the use of this test has been successful in 
 creating independence when applied to the one 
 
 * Mr Chadwick always objected to the use of the term Work- 
 house Test. The so-called workhouse has never, under the New Poor 
 Law, been a place where serious work was a feature of its manage- 
 ment. For the sick it is a hospital, and for the aged an asylum ; 
 the able-bodied, for whom it might be a place of work, are not, as 
 a rule, to be found there. The principle of the institutional relief 
 system makes administrators take the position " We will relieve 
 altogether, or not at all." This, Mr Chadwick was fond of pointing 
 out, is the rule of the workman's own Friendly Society, which pro- 
 hibits its members in receipt of benefit from earning wages. The 
 Friendly Society is a mutual institution in which the esprit de corps 
 is very strong, yet the difficulty in checking improper claims is well 
 known. The poor rate is a common prey protected by no such 
 considerations. There is no chance of mutual investigation, such 
 as hardly serves to prevent imposture in the Friendly Society. The 
 only way to insure observance of the principle, " all or nothing," is 
 to fence the poor rate by the institutional test. 
 
86 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 form of responsibility to which the Commis- 
 sioners explicitly and formally recommended its 
 application, why should it not be extended 
 further ? 
 
 To this point, in a later chapter, we shall have 
 to return. Here we merely allude to the subject 
 by way of protest against the assumption that 
 the Commissioners deliberately, and for all time, 
 limited the responsibility of the able-bodied to 
 the one period of his life. You cannot, as John 
 Bright once said, drive six omnibuses abreast 
 through Temple Bar. The one particular omni- 
 bus that the Commissioners had to pilot through 
 Parliament was a bill curtailing the facilities of 
 Poor Law relief to the able-bodied. They left 
 something to be done for the full emancipation 
 of the pauper to this generation, which, alas ! has 
 done very little. 
 
 The denial of out-door relief to the able- 
 bodied, and the institution, for this class, of the 
 Workhouse Test, was the operative reform in- 
 dicated. The next question was : Who were 
 to be the authorities ? Every single authority 
 hitherto charged with this duty had failed. 
 
 The parish area is declared to be too 
 small. Contrary to the very generally conceived 
 opinion, the smaller the area, the greater had been 
 the tendency to corruption and mismanagement. 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 87 
 
 The small parishes, moreover, could not afford 
 to do things properly. The idea of unions of 
 parishes was accordingly set up. The tempta- 
 tion to peculation would be less powerful. The 
 aggregation of paupers would make it worth 
 while to classify. There would be greater 
 economy in wholesale management. 
 
 This part of the plan was specially Mr 
 Chadwick's contribution, derived, as I have said, 
 from Bentham's teaching. This much was ulti- 
 mately adopted, but there were other proposals 
 put forward by Mr Chadwick, more or less 
 essential to his own and Bentham's plans, which 
 were rejected. This is a very important point, 
 and one which is very usually overlooked by 
 historians and critics of the Act. 
 
 Bentham in his Scheme of Pauper Manage- 
 ment, and Mr Chadwick now, deliberately wished 
 to get rid of local and empirical administra- 
 tion, or, at least, to reduce it to a minimum. 
 Mr Chadwick was willing to see boards of 
 guardians elected for the new unions, but he 
 wished them to have nothing to do with relief. 
 This was to be placed in the hands of salaried 
 experts, responsible to a central authority. 
 Relief, moreover, was to be entirely institutional, 
 i.e. given within the walls of some Poor Law 
 establishment. The guardians, locally elected, 
 
88 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 were merely to inspect Poor Law institutions, 
 as the visiting justices inspected prisons. 
 
 It was, in fact, a proposal for a responsible 
 bureaucracy. This was, as we all know, set aside. 
 It is not even included in the recommendation 
 of the Report ; but it is important to notice that 
 only a portion of Mr Chadwick's scheme was 
 adopted, and that he never ceased to complain 
 of the mutilation of his plan. 
 
 This part of the Report shows some traces 
 of difference of opinion, or, rather, much of it 
 seems to lead to a recommendation which is not 
 there. The report alludes to a desire which 
 they found among the most intelligent adminis- 
 trators, " that the smallest detail should be unalter- 
 ably prescribed by the legislature." They gather 
 also, as an inevitable consequence, from the 
 evidence that "the legislature should divest 
 the local authorities of all discretionary power in 
 the administration of relief ." This recommenda- 
 tion, however, is not formally made. Their 
 formal recommendation with regard to a central 
 authority is as follows : 
 
 " We recommend therefore the appointment of a Central 
 Board to control the administration of the Poor Law, with 
 such assistant Commissioners as may be found requisite, and 
 that the Commissioners be empowered and directed to frame 
 and enforce regulations, for the government of workhouses, 
 and as to the nature and amount of the relief to be given, 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 89 
 
 and the labour to be exacted in them, and that such 
 regulations shall, as far as may be practicable, be uniform 
 throughout the country." 
 
 This, of course, is a very large power to in- 
 trust to any public body. Parliament, however, 
 accepted the recommendation, and, feeling that 
 the details were for it unmanageable, delegated 
 its authority to three experts, who had to assume 
 all the odium of enforcing an unpopular revolution. 
 It was, however, a small power compared with 
 that which had been exercised for centuries by 
 the petty local officers who, practically at discretion, 
 had administered the parochial relief system of 
 the country. As events have proved, moreover, 
 the authority of the Central Board, great as 
 it nominally is, has never been equal to inducing 
 the local bodies to accept its views. For long 
 it kept up a running commentary of protest in 
 favour of the principles of 1834. Not till the 
 closing months of the last century has the Central 
 Authority shown any sign of reaction.* It is to 
 be hoped that boards of guardians will be as 
 impervious to reactionary counsels, as they have 
 hitherto been to counsels of reform. It is to 
 his prescience of these difficulties that Mr 
 Chadwick's objection to a divided authority 
 may be ascribed. 
 
 * See p. 190. 
 
90 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 To create large local bodies, by means of 
 popular election, for the administration of this 
 difficult system, and then to subject them to 
 the coercion of a board of experts sitting at 
 Whitehall, was a very perfect receipt for 
 making friction. It might control abuses, but 
 it was certain ultimately to paralyse progress. 
 Mr Chadwick's proposal was to put the local 
 bodies in such a helplessly inferior position, as 
 regards authority, that effectual opposition of 
 local authorities to Central ideas of administration 
 would have been impossible. The rejection of his 
 advice has made Poor Law administration a sort 
 of cockpit for contentions of the local and central 
 authority, and ensured the continuance of abuses 
 which a single responsibility, either local or central, 
 might have reformed. At the same time and 
 after all, the blame for this miscarriage rests not 
 with the early Commissioners, who did what was 
 practicable at the time, but with a later generation. 
 
 The rest of the recommendations need not 
 detain us ; they consist largely in advising that 
 the introduction of the new Act, the forming of 
 unions, the time of bringing the new rules into 
 operation, and the details generally, should be 
 left to the Central Board. 
 
 A bill was introduced practically on these 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 91 
 
 lines. It was drafted by Mr Nassau Senior, 
 and he attended the Committees of the Cabinet 
 to explain the bill. He left a MS. account 
 of these meetings, which I have been allowed 
 to see. One of the points which struck me in 
 reading this memorandum, and, I have no doubt, 
 struck Mr Senior also in writing it, was the 
 curious way in which some Cabinet ministers 
 would come and suggest the introduction of a 
 clause authorising the continuance of an old 
 abuse, or perhaps suggesting a new one based 
 on the old principle, apparently quite unconscious 
 of the grave economic principles which were at 
 stake. If even Cabinet ministers found it diffi- 
 cult to legislate in accordance with principles 
 which they were supposed to have accepted, it 
 is obvious that we are incurring great dangers 
 when large powers of discretion are placed in 
 the hands of local administrators who cannot, 
 on an average, be as well read and informed 
 as Cabinet ministers. 
 
 The bill, however, got through the Cabinet, 
 and was introduced by Lord Althorp and passed 
 through Parliament in the course of the session 
 of 1834. It is very creditable to the Parliament 
 of the day that it passed. I do not think that 
 any Government of our own day would venture 
 to bring in such a bill, and if they did, it would 
 
92 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 provoke an amount of opposition which would, 
 I believe, prove fatal to its passage. 
 
 The circumstances were peculiar. The Whig 
 ministries of the time are generally represented 
 to have cut a sorry and timorous figure. Be 
 this as it may, it was a time when Liberal 
 principles wielded an undoubted authority. The 
 Liberal of that day was guided by a belief 
 in the salutary influence of liberty and in 
 the possibility of working-class independence. 
 Philosophical Liberalism was something above 
 and apart from political party. It kept men 
 like Francis Place from lending their influence 
 and aid to the Socialist side of the Chartist 
 agitation. In spite of his own party, it inspired 
 Peel with those principles of fiscal reform which 
 will ever entitle him to the gratitude of the 
 civilised world. It has been well said that it 
 is the only party of political opinion (as a party 
 it was rarely, and only for a brief period, in 
 office and in power) which has ever attempted 
 to apply a definite body of doctrine to the 
 business of government. The abolition of the 
 worst abuses of the Old Poor Law and the repeal 
 of the Corn Laws are instalments of reform 
 which we owe to its exposition of the far- 
 reaching economic doctrine of Free Exchange. 
 
 A few of the extreme and less educated 
 

 in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 93 
 
 members of both parties offered opposition, 
 Cobbett, of course, opposed everything but 
 there was really no serious opposition from 
 that side of the house ; and the leaders of the 
 Tory party, to their great credit, abstained from 
 opposing the Act, while the Duke of Wellington, 
 who here, as on many other occasions, rose 
 above party, gave it his warm support. 
 
 Sir Robert Peel remarked some years after- 
 wards, when it fell to his lot as minister to 
 defend the measure, which he did with complete 
 conviction and loyalty, that such a bill could 
 never have been passed by a Conservative 
 Government. It was a measure which could 
 only be successfully carried through Parliament 
 by a party which was regarded as specially the 
 exponent of popular sentiment. 
 
 When the bill had got through the Commons, 
 Lord Grey resigned, and for a moment its fate 
 was doubtful. During the interregnum the 
 subject was raised more than once, and its 
 opponents, mainly among the Tories, urged 
 that the bill should be dropped. It was at 
 this crisis that the influence of the Duke of 
 Wellington was exerted, and, in this respect, 
 he probably did his country a service not less 
 notable than that which he rendered in the 
 Peninsula and at Waterloo. 
 
94 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 The Government was reconstructed with Lord 
 Melbourne at its head. Lord Brougham, the 
 Chancellor, undertook the introduction of the 
 bill to the Lords. With all his extraordinary 
 ability and industry, his lordship was a danger- 
 ous ally. Notwithstanding the protests both of 
 Mr Senior, who was shown his notes, and of 
 his own colleagues, he made a speech which 
 was hostile to the principle of a Poor Law alto- 
 gether, and his attitude alarmed timid supporters. 
 Mr Senior's note on the matter is, that what he 
 said was true, but injudicious, that the argument 
 was admirably stated, and probably did no harm, 
 even if it proved too much for the occasion. 
 
 The Duke of Wellington dissociated himself 
 from Lord Brougham's condemnation of all 
 Poor Laws. The Duke had a constitutional dis- 
 like of theories, but he supported this bill, 
 which was not a bill, he said, for abolition of 
 the Poor Law. When his followers began to 
 complain of the lateness of the session and to 
 propose postponement, he very curtly told them 
 that it was their duty to stay and pass this 
 measure. 
 
 The most elaborate attack made on the bill 
 was that of Mr Poulett Scrope in the Commons. 
 The principal point which he made against the 
 measure is of extreme interest, and in view of 
 
HI.] THE NEW FUUJK LAW 95 
 
 subsequent events deserves to be considered in 
 detail. 
 
 He pointed out quite truly that the bill was 
 a departure from the principle of the Act of 
 Elizabeth, which was to set the poor on work, 
 and to provide work and stock for all who 
 demanded it. " You profess," he said, "to be re- 
 turning to the wisdom of Elizabeth : you are 
 not so returning. A man asks you for work, 
 you do not give him work, but you lock him 
 up in a workhouse." 
 
 This was a difficult line " of argument to 
 answer for those who believed that there was 
 any wisdom in the Act of Elizabeth. He then 
 went on (and to this argument special atten- 
 tion is due) : The duty of the legislature 
 is to find work for all. If the legislature will 
 perform its duty in this respect, there is no 
 need to trouble about the aged, the sick, the 
 widow and the orphan. They will be supported 
 by the able-bodied of their family and class and 
 possibly he might have allowed us to add, by 
 savings made during the period of full 
 employment. 
 
 His argument was not listened to, it certainly 
 was not answered. What he says is perfectly 
 true, for if we can secure the independence of 
 the able-bodied, there should be no need of large 
 
96 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 measures of intervention in favour of those who 
 are not able-bodied ; the able-bodied period of 
 their own lives, and of those on whom they have 
 a natural claim, should be sufficient to meet all 
 ordinary emergencies. 
 
 What Mr Scrope did not see was that the 
 steps taken in the bill to cut off the able-bodied 
 from all out-door relief was a much more effec- 
 tual way of securing their independence and full 
 employment than the procedure recommended 
 by himself and by the vaunted wisdom of 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 The rest of his argument seems to me to 
 hold. If the independence of the able-bodied can 
 be secured (and it has been secured by the very 
 measure which Mr Scrope condemned), there 
 ought to be no difficulty in getting the able- 
 bodied to assume a fuller responsibility for the 
 rest of the risks of life. 
 
 We shall see presently when we come to 
 describe the working of the Act, how some Boards 
 of Guardians have made use of the discretion 
 allowed to them, and, by a policy of strict 
 administration, have obliged the able-bodied to be 
 responsible for the unable-bodied period of their 
 own lives, and of those dependent on them ; 
 and how, in every instance where this line of 
 action has been followed, a higher range of inde- 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 97 
 
 pendence has been attained. Their experience 
 proves, in fact, how entirely just the latter part of 
 Mr Scrope's argument was, and, at the same 
 time, how entirely mistaken as to the steps to 
 be taken to secure the initial independence of 
 the able-bodied. 
 
 Of course, in addition to the criticism of 
 Mr Scrope, there was a loud outcry among the 
 sentimentalists. It was, they said, a monstrous 
 thing to deprive the poor man of a fund which 
 appeared to belong to him ; but the burden 
 of pauperism had grown intolerable, and the 
 country was ready, in despair, to give a trial to 
 any plan recommended to it by high authority. 
 
 It was not, therefore, till the Act got into 
 operation, and till the Commissioners had to 
 exert authority to get its provisions adopted, 
 in places where the Poor Law had not been so 
 badly mismanaged for example in the northern 
 towns that the great outcry arose. They intro- 
 duced the law first into the worst districts, namely, 
 into the south, and their action here was welcome. 
 It was only later that the outcry became violent, 
 and then only in a few places. 
 
 It is worth while to compare this crisis with 
 the crisis which arose in the time of Elizabeth. 
 At the earlier period the sentimental instinct 
 prevailed, and the economic principle of liberty 
 
 G 
 
98 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 and exchange was neglected and set aside. 
 Instead, the decaying principle of feudalism was 
 revived in the Poor Law, and, as my subsequent 
 narrative has been designed to show, the mistaken 
 policy was adopted of attempting the solution of 
 an economic problem by sentimental, empirical, 
 and temporary palliatives. 
 
 In 1834 the country was confronted by a 
 similar crisis. The sentimental empiricism of 
 Elizabeth's Act was discredited by the fearful 
 abuses which it had created. It was perhaps 
 easier on that account to get the uninstructed 
 public to agree to a more scientific treatment 
 of this malady. To the uninstructed the obvious 
 remedy for distress is relief, and plenty of it. 
 The folly of this treatment had become apparent, 
 and the Whig Government of 1834 carried an 
 Act which gave a wiser answer to the question 
 than that which was given in 1601. 
 
 Unfortunately, as we shall presently see, the 
 reform has only gone a very little way, and our 
 poorer classes are still doomed to spend a portion 
 of their lives among the flesh-pots of parochial 
 bondage. I have indicated already some of the 
 causes which limited the reforms, and in the next 
 chapter I shall have to point out how dispauperisa- 
 tion, although practicable, has never been adopted 
 as a policy. 
 
in.] THE NEW POOR LAW 99 
 
 Still, with all its imperfections, the new Act 
 was a first instalment towards the emancipation 
 of the poor from the Poor Law. 
 
 Relief to the able-bodied was not prohibited, 
 but it was to be given under conditions which, 
 it was well known, would be severely deterrent. 
 It was proved that this had been effectual 
 in emancipating the able-bodied population at 
 Southwell, Bingham, and elsewhere, and the 
 legislature faced the unpopular duty of obliging 
 other authorities to follow these salutary 
 examples. 
 
 When the pressure, which, as we have seen, 
 was principally caused by the demand of the 
 able-bodied, was reduced, the local administra- 
 tions were able to turn to better methods for 
 the relief of other forms of distress. Classifica- 
 tion became possible, and a decent treatment 
 of the young, the sick, and the aged was 
 brought within the means of all, even the 
 poorest local authority. This was the merit 
 of the Act, but the merit of the Report goes a 
 good deal further. 
 
 In the pages of this memorable document 
 there is to be found a most complete and irre- 
 fragable statement of principles going to the 
 very root of the matter. The recommendations, 
 and the Act which was subsequently founded 
 
ioo PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. in. 
 
 on them, are only an instalment of the reforma- 
 tion of which the subject is capable. 
 
 Regard had to be paid to what was practi- 
 cable. A disease of long standing cannot be 
 cured by subjecting the patient at once to 
 the full regimen of health, but the approach 
 to, and ultimate adoption of, such a regimen 
 must ever be an object with each successive 
 generation. 
 
 It should be our business to complete, as 
 far as circumstances may permit, the dispauper- 
 isation of the remnant that still remains confined 
 in a condition of parochial dependence. Wise 
 methods of treatment can be learnt in the pages 
 of the Report of 1834. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE NEW POOR LAW 
 
 WE have now to consider the results which 
 followed from the introduction of the new 
 Poor Law. The new Poor Law, while it did 
 not abolish relief to the able-bodied, ordered 
 that relief should only be given under conditions 
 which were, in large measure, prohibitive. The 
 offer of relief in a workhouse came very near 
 to being a denial of relief. It practically freed 
 the administrator from the most importunate 
 class of applicants under the old law, and he 
 was thus able to turn his mind to improving the 
 relief arrangements for the sick, the aged, and 
 for children. 
 
 The Legislature had seen that it could not 
 trust to the local administrator to initiate these 
 reforms of his own motion. It had, therefore, 
 created a new Board of Control, and left it to 
 this body to choose the season and manner in 
 which the new system was to be introduced. 
 
 The new Board consisted of three Com- 
 
 101 
 
102 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 missioners, who were, Sir Thomas Frankland 
 Lewis, Mr J. G. Shaw Lefevre, and Mr George 
 Nicholls, with Mr Chadwick as their secretary. 
 This was a grievance to Mr Chadwick, who 
 really was, in large measure, the author of the 
 new law. He complained of being put in a 
 subordinate position, under chiefs who did not 
 fully sympathise with the policy of the new 
 law, or, perhaps to speak more correctly, with 
 his conception of what that policy ought to be. 
 Mr Chadwick, as I pointed out in the last 
 chapter, wanted to supersede local elected 
 bodies altogether, and to replace them by a 
 new service of salaried experts ; but though 
 the Legislature gave very wide and almost 
 despotic powers to the Central Board (which 
 was supposed to be inspired by the principles 
 of the Report of 1834), it also created new 
 popular bodies in each locality who were not 
 experts. These new bodies, whether it was 
 intended or not, have been too powerful for 
 the Central Board, and what Mr Chadwick re- 
 garded as expert and responsible administration 
 has never been generally adopted. 
 
 On one point, and on one point only, the 
 authority of the Central Commissioners did 
 prevail, viz., in the abolition of out-door relief 
 to the able-bodied. In the south the local 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 103 
 
 administrator had been reduced to despair, and 
 eagerly sought the help of the assistant Com- 
 missioners, who were sent round the provinces 
 to introduce the new law. 
 
 The evils which the Old Poor Law sought 
 to remedy had been generally attributed to 
 over-population. The work of Malthus had 
 attracted great attention, and there were many 
 symptoms which gave a plausible support to this 
 view. There is, without doubt, a tendency in 
 mankind to increase and multiply, and, if the con- 
 fines of the world and of industry were rigidly 
 fixed and incapable of expansion, there would be 
 no escape from the melancholy prognostications 
 of Malthus and his sect. Under the Old Poor 
 Law the limits of industry were rigidly fixed. 
 The labourer felt himself obliged to stay at his 
 place of settlement, and to continue at his ancient 
 calling. So at Bledlow, as described a few pages 
 back, he insisted on having work found for him 
 in his parish, useless work which was so absurd 
 in its character that, instead of doing it, he lay 
 and slept under the hedges, and refused to walk 
 into the next parish, where the railway, a typical 
 instance of the new industry that was then im- 
 pending, was waiting to be made. 
 
 The great merit of the new law was that, at 
 a stroke, it struck these fetters from the energies 
 
io 4 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 of the labouring class. Full energy and in- 
 dustrial competence does not follow at once on 
 a mere legislative act of emancipation, and, 
 even to this day, some of the old evil influence 
 remains ; but the first important step in emanci- 
 pation was taken by the New Poor Law, and, 
 indeed, the change that was brought about 
 instantaneously was almost miraculous. 
 
 The three Commissioners published very 
 careful annual reports of their proceedings. 
 The interest of the situation turns mainly on 
 the well-nigh instantaneous absorption of the 
 able-bodied pauper population into the inde- 
 pendent industrial community. I have been at 
 pains in a supplemental volume to Sir G. 
 Nicholls' History to set out the different ways 
 in which absorption took place. 
 
 Sometimes in a parish where previously there 
 had been every appearance of congestion and of 
 a surplus population, the prohibition of outdoor 
 relief at once restored a natural order of things, 
 the farmers were obliged to pay a full wage, 
 and the labourer was ready to give a good 
 day's work. Confidence was restored, and the 
 " human exchanges," as Chalmers termed it, 
 began again to perform their beneficent work. 
 Without the migration of a single person, 
 parishes which formerly appeared to be con- 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 105 
 
 gested with a surplus population were peopled 
 again by an industrious and independent 
 peasantry. The following is the sort of remark 
 that passed in the hearing of the assistant Com- 
 missioners : "In old days," said a farmer, " I 
 would have given money to keep that man off 
 my land ; now he gives me a good day's work 
 for a good day's pay, and I would gladly employ 
 a dozen such." 
 
 Sometimes the alleged surplus walked into 
 the next parish. There were new industries on 
 every side, and it is to be observed that, in a 
 parish where there may have been surplus, it 
 was not necessary for the whole population to 
 acquire the mobility which is appropriate to an 
 efficient industrial community. All that is re- 
 quired to give relief to the pressure is that a 
 few shall move. A glass of water that is 
 brimming over does not require to be emptied ; 
 a few drops taken from the top will enable it 
 to fulfil its purpose without spilling. The move- 
 ment of population which took place at this 
 date was not perceptibly great, still a healthy 
 industrial temper, a thing in its way quite as 
 important as freer migration, was created. A 
 man, when his natural responsibilities are allowed 
 to rest on him for the first time, finds it possible 
 to do many things which he never tried before. 
 
106 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 It was no longer his interest, now that relief 
 in aid of wages and the allowance system were 
 at an end, to avoid the appearance, and, with 
 the appearance, the reality of industry and 
 prosperity. Formerly no farmer could employ 
 a labourer without setting some one to watch 
 over him ; now he could trust him to work 
 with a minimum of supervision. Labourers now 
 became eager to obtain allotments, and added 
 from this source to their slender wages. 
 
 Another cause of improvement was the wiser 
 expenditure of the poor. Mr Chadwick has 
 pointed out how an income drawn from the 
 tainted source of the poor rate, even when the 
 condition of the pauper labourer was most de- 
 pressed, seemed always to leave a margin for 
 waste. Even in places where the entire annual 
 value of the land had been swallowed up by 
 the poor rate, there was still a great deal of 
 unwise expenditure. Thus at Cholesbury, the 
 unhappy parish where the overseers were at 
 length forced to throw up their books, and 
 where the rate could no longer be collected, 
 there were still two public-houses. Many in- 
 stances are given in the early reports of an 
 improvement in this respect. 
 
 The withdrawal of expenditure from the 
 public-house under the pressure of the new law 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 107 
 
 is typical of the diversion of expenditure which 
 follows every restriction of the Poor Law. The 
 fuller responsibility thrown on the labourer does 
 not interfere with his necessary consumption, 
 but only with his superfluities. His superfluous 
 expenditure is forced into better and wiser 
 channels, and, apart from the benefit to himself, 
 industry gains from the healthier direction which 
 is given to working-class demand. 
 
 Indeed, the best and most formidable com- 
 petitor to the public - house is the natural 
 responsibility which rests on every man, till it 
 is intercepted by some device of the Poor Law, 
 to make provision for old age, sickness, and 
 the other risks of life. 
 
 Notwithstanding the Commissioners' record 
 of the benefit derived from the Act, as not 
 unfrequently happens in such matters, the out- 
 cry of a few, whose interests and prejudices 
 appeared to be threatened, drowned the 
 whispered acknowledgment that a great and 
 salutary reform had been effected. Before 
 long there arose a strong opposition to the 
 Act, more especially in the large manufacturing 
 centres of the north. The Times took up an 
 attitude hostile to the law, a certain section of 
 the Chartists, notwithstanding the protests of 
 Francis Place, excited the populace, and the 
 
io8 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND TCHAP. 
 
 difficulties of the Commissioners became very 
 great. The Commissioners, moreover, were a 
 divided body, as great differences of opinion 
 had arisen between them and their secretary, 
 Mr Chadwick. They did, however, succeed in 
 issuing an order prohibitory of outdoor relief 
 to the able-bodied to all, or nearly all, of 
 the rural unions ; but in view of the strong 
 opposition raised in the towns, they wavered, 
 and issued to the towns an order which sub- 
 sequently, after many amendments and modi- 
 fications, became the Outdoor Relief Regulation 
 Order. This order was much less stringent 
 than the Prohibition order, and, in many places, 
 the issue even of this- order was delayed. It 
 permitted out-relief to be given under a labour 
 test, which need not be exacted in a workhouse, 
 and somewhat enlarged the exceptions which 
 were exempted from the Prohibitory order. 
 
 It was Mr Chadwick's contention (and, when 
 the rupture became public, he was supported 
 by Lord Brougham, Mr Roebuck, and some 
 of the more extreme Radicals in the House of 
 Commons), that this vacillation on the part of 
 the Commissioners was fatal to their policy. 
 Mr Chadwick and his supporters have it on 
 their side, that all experience seems to show 
 that, if this subject is handled firmly, the 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 109 
 
 difficulty is much less. The first introduction 
 of a stricter system is always difficult, but once 
 it has been introduced, it works much more 
 smoothly than a lax system. The strict system 
 works automatically, there is no favouritism, the 
 relief given, if unpalatable in respect of the con- 
 finement of the workhouse, is adequate. There 
 is no room for importunate demands to secure 
 increased allowances, nor for the canvassing, 
 jealousy and disappointments which are charac- 
 teristic of the laxer system. 
 
 The truth is that the opposition was largely 
 factious and political. The Commissioners 
 were most unfairly placed under a cross-fire. 
 Mr Chadwick and his Radical friends com- 
 plained that they had not been strenuous 
 enough in pushing forward the policy of the 
 Report of 1834. On the other hand, the 
 Chartists, the sentimentalists, Mr Disraeli, and 
 the Tory Democrat of the day, attacked the new 
 system on the ground that it was too severe. 
 
 Whether, if the Commissioners had adopted 
 the very strenuous line advocated by Mr Chadwick 
 and persons like Place, they would have been 
 able to ride out the storm, it is difficult to say. 
 An incident, however, arose, of no great import- 
 ance in itself which precipitated a crisis. At 
 Andover there was an unfortunate scandal of 
 
no PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 administration. Sir James Graham, the Home 
 Secretary, when questioned in Parliament, de- 
 scribed it, truly enough, as a workhouse squabble 
 in the South of England. It turned in the first 
 instance on the propriety of bone-crushing as 
 a labour test for able-bodied paupers. There 
 were also accusations of immorality against the 
 workhouse master. One of the assistant Com- 
 missioners was sent to inquire into the matter. 
 The inhabitants of the place formed themselves 
 into factions on one side and the other. The 
 assistant Commissioner was supposed to have 
 unduly hurried over the inquiry, and endeavoured 
 to compose the scandal. When public attention 
 was called to the matter, the Commissioners and 
 Sir James Graham condemned the conduct of 
 their assistant, and asked for his resignation. His 
 friends took the matter up, and that of another 
 assistant who had been similarly called on to 
 resign. Mr Chadwick then appeared as a 
 hostile witness against his chiefs. The so-called 
 Andover Inquiry developed into an inquiry into 
 the management of the Commission generally, 
 and the evidence of internal dissension, which 
 was very maliciously brought out, did consider- 
 able damage to its reputation. 
 
 The result of it all was that the Government 
 of Lord John Russell, which in May, 1847, 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW in 
 
 succeeded the great Ministry of Sir R. Peel, 
 brought in a bill to abolish the Commissioners. 
 
 o 
 
 and to appoint in their place a Poor Law Board. 
 The Commissioners hitherto had had no re- 
 presentative in Parliament, for it had been 
 thought possible and preferable to make this 
 office unpolitical. Now the argument was 
 accepted that the friction which had arisen 
 would be more easily removed if the head of 
 the Poor Law Board was a member of the 
 Government. The change was accordingly 
 made, and the Poor Law Board was instituted. 
 This, in 1871, was abolished in favour of the 
 Local Government Board a change merely of 
 name and the head of the Poor Law adminis- 
 tration is now the President of the Local 
 Government Board. 
 
 How far the expectation of the Government 
 that the change would make the law more work- 
 able has proved correct, it is difficult to say. 
 What has really made the law more workable 
 seems rather to have been the much less 
 aggressive attitude taken up by the Central 
 Authority to the abuses of the Poor Law. 
 
 Practically by 1847 the great battle against 
 able-bodied pauperism had been fought and won. 
 The able-bodied pauper had already been forced 
 into a position of independence. The introduc- 
 
ii2 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 tion of Free Trade had begun to cause an unpre- 
 cedented demand for labour of all kinds. In 
 many various directions technical skill was being 
 acquired. A large section of the labouring class 
 was safely extricated from the slough of pauperism, 
 and showed no tendency to return. The local 
 authorities, though by no means expert, had, 
 some of them, sense enough to see the danger 
 of relapse. Even where a return to old abuses, 
 with regard to the treatment of the able-bodied, 
 was threatened, the authority of the Central 
 Board had been sufficient to maintain the 
 ground that had been gained. 
 
 Since this date the change of attitude on 
 the part of the Central Board has been very 
 marked. In the early years of the Com- 
 missioners' tenure of office their action was 
 distinctly aggressive, and, if Mr Chadwick's 
 policy had prevailed, they would have con- 
 tinued to be aggressive, till they had obliged 
 the local bodies to adopt their views. The 
 over- rule of such a Board on a matter of this 
 nature was a thing which local bodies in 
 England were not likely to stand indefinitely, 
 and the Poor Law constitution of 1834 has 
 only been found workable, because, practically, 
 the Central Board, in respect of Poor Law 
 reform, has been content to take a subordinate 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 113 
 
 position in everything except the prohibition 
 of outdoor relief to the able-bodied. Since 
 then, as to the main principle of relief, it has 
 been advisory rather than regulative. Possibly 
 no other course was open to it. It has, in this 
 later period, endeavoured to effect by persuasion 
 and argument reforms which it had the power 
 to effect peremptorily, and it has been moder- 
 ately successful. As might be expected, it has 
 succeeded in pushing forward popular reforms, 
 more easily than those which, though equally 
 necessary, are unpopular. 
 
 The administration of the Poor Law has, or 
 ought to have, two objects. One is to secure 
 adequate, prompt, and appropriate relief for the 
 destitute. That is a popular object, even though 
 it is costly. The Local Government Board has 
 had no difficulty in inducing the local adminis- 
 trator to spend very freely for the purpose of 
 building schools and infirmaries, and generally 
 in trying to do this work well. This aspect of 
 the question, I should say in passing, was deemed 
 very important by Mr Chadwick and by his 
 master, Jeremy Bentham. In Mr Chad wick's 
 conception of the well-governed community, the 
 treatment of disease and sanitation was to be 
 entrusted to an expert bureaucracy, and he 
 
 confidently expected very large reforms from this 
 
 H 
 
ii4 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 policy. We have got the large system of treat- 
 ment in our Poor Law infirmaries, schools, 
 lunatic asylums, but in Mr Chadwick's view the 
 subordination of the expert and salaried official 
 to the inexpert and irresponsible local repre- 
 sentatives mars its effectiveness. The danger 
 attaching to the present system of Poor Law 
 medical treatment, and to the even more 
 effective system which Mr Chadwick would 
 have liked to inaugurate, is, that it makes for 
 fthe universal gratuitous treatment of the poor in 
 sickness, a result not compatible with the ideal 
 of absolute independence which alone is likely 
 to satisfy the aspiration of the labourer. What 
 Bentham and Chadwick would have done to 
 check this tendency, we hardly know, as their 
 views were never given a fair trial. This first 
 object of Poor Law administration, the pro- 
 vision of adequate institutional treatment for 
 the destitute, promoted amid favouring popular 
 breezes by the Central Board, has been readily 
 accepted by the local authorities. 
 
 The second object of the administration of 
 the Poor Law is less popular. It is the task 
 of dispauperisation. It has been well said that 
 no Poor Law system is efficacious, unless its 
 influence is centrifugal and not centripetal. This 
 means that the Poor Law ought to be perpetually 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 115 
 
 putting pressure on the pauper class, urging it 
 away from reliance on the rates, in the hope 
 that much of it will naturally gravitate to the 
 independence of the industrial life. In other 
 words, the poor rate must never become a centre 
 of attraction and expectation for the poor. 
 
 I have endeavoured throughout to represent 
 that the primitive condition of mankind is not 
 only one of poverty, but of a certain impervious- 
 ness to economic motive of all kind. Civilisation 
 means the gradual organisation of society on 
 the basis of the economic order. This is carried 
 out and built up by allowing man to follow the 
 teaching of what Chalmers has called the " human 
 exchanges." Pauperism is the last remnant of 
 that primitive condition of disability, of which 
 already a great, perhaps we may say the greater, 
 part has vanished, and given place to the honour- 
 able interdependence of an industrial community. 
 Now, the proper treatment of the evil that still 
 remains with us requires something more than 
 the endowment, by means of legal machinery of 
 those who succeed in getting themselves accepted 
 as destitute. Beyond elaborate and adequate 
 systems of relief, we do require, in the cause of 
 progress, the adoption of measures calculated to 
 detach the poor, more or less forcibly, from a 
 contented reliance on the poor rate. 
 
n6 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 It is supposed to be one of the great merits 
 of the English Poor Law, as modified by the 
 Amendment Act of 1834, that it fulfils these 
 conditions. 'By means of a series of institutions 
 it enables the administrator to offer, in every 
 alleged case of destitution, adequate and appro- 
 priate forms of relief. It is also supposed that 
 the confinement and discipline of these Poor 
 Law establishments will be such that no applicant 
 will accept the offer, unless he is absolutely un- 
 
 L 
 
 able to live on his own resources. | Further and 
 this perhaps is of more importance the pro- 
 spective offer of relief under these conditions 
 does not encourage a fatal acquiescence in dis- 
 abilities which can be removed by a suitable 
 admixture of energy and caution certain to be 
 developed in the character of the poorer class 
 by -the mere experience of lifeN 
 
 This is the ideal that the framers of the Poor 
 Law Amendment Act had in view. {^ In other 
 words, it was to provide the country with an 
 instrument that would serve the double purpose 
 of relieving destitution, and of dissipating the 
 moral and economic atmosphere which was 
 favourable to the growth and permanence of the 
 pauper habit/") 
 
 Our business as students and critics is to 
 consider how far the object of the framers o 1 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 117 
 
 the law has been met, how far, in fact, the in- 
 strument which they made has achieved its 
 purpose. 
 
 I have already indicated that, as far as the 
 able-bodied labourer is concerned, he has, during 
 the able-bodied period of his life, been more 
 or less completely emancipated from parochial 
 servitude. I have also pointed out that 
 when this advance had been secured, the 
 motive power making for administrative reform, 
 viz., the authority of an expert Central Board, 
 appears to have been exhausted. The principal 
 authority then became vested in the local 
 bodies. The members of these were by no 
 means experts, and though elected for the 
 government of a larger area than heretofore, 
 they were still irresponsible and still liable to 
 be influenced by the prejudices which had been 
 so fatal in the period previous to the reform 
 of 1834. 
 
 The instrument of the New Poor Law logically 
 applied might be admirable for effecting its 
 purpose, but it obviously required to be handled 
 by persons who understood its use, in fact by 
 experts. The chances of having the matter 
 handled in an "expert" fashion by locally 
 elected administrators were very remote. 
 
 It has been said, and the point deserves 
 
n8 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 notice, that the Poor Law Commissioners, whose 
 words are often cited as sources of plenary 
 inspiration, limited their expectation of reform 
 to the case of the able-bodied daring their able- 
 bodied period of life. It is true that during the 
 pressure of controversy, language of this sort is 
 to be found incidentally in the Reports. It is, 
 however, necessary to distinguish the first great 
 Report of the Commission of Inquiry, and the 
 subsequent reports issued by the three Com- 
 missioners after the introduction of the law. 
 
 The Report of the Commission of Inquiry 
 insists only on the abolition of outdoor relief 
 to the able-bodied. It says, however, nothing 
 to forbid the application of its principles to a 
 wider area. We know, also, that it was in 
 Mr Chadwick's mind gradually, and as occasion 
 offered, to stop outdoor relief altogether. 
 
 The Report of the three Commissioners, 
 appointed in pursuance of the Act, has not the 
 same authority as the Report of Inquiry. They 
 wrote under great pressure, and with divided 
 counsels, and, on one occasion at all events, 
 they declare that they had no intention of 
 pushing on the prohibition order to cover the 
 case of the aged, unless circumstances and abuses 
 render it necessary. At other portions of their 
 reports they lay down principles, diametrically 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 119 
 
 opposed to this admission, which undoubtedly 
 carry us much further in a policy of restriction 
 than they thought it advisable to go. 
 
 At this time of day, however, we are not 
 absolutely bound by their conclusions. As their 
 conclusions are contradictory, this is not possible. 
 We have to decide whether we shall follow the 
 Commissioners in their stricter and more scientific 
 mood, or allow ourselves to be influenced by 
 chance expressions of compromise wrung from 
 them in the course of a bitter and critical 
 controversy. We have to consider, as practical 
 men of full age, whether further measures of 
 dispauperisation are possible or not. 
 
 In 1839, the three Commissioners were 
 invited by Lord John Russell to make a report 
 on certain suggestions that had been made as 
 to their continuance in office, and as to the 
 further amendment of the law. Their reply, 
 known as the "Continuance Report, 1839," con- 
 tains one of the most forcible statements of 
 principles which is to be found in the whole 
 range of Poor Law literature : 
 
 "The fundamental principle," they say, "with respect to 
 the relief of the poor is, that the condition of the pauper ought 
 to be, on the whole, less eligible than that of the independent 
 labourer. . . . The truth of this principle has either been 
 generally admitted, or, at least, has not been disputed; but 
 the difficulty has consisted in applying it to practice." 
 
120 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 Elsewhere the situation has been summed up 
 by saying that Poor Law relief should be con- 
 fined to the destitute : that is to say, it is not 
 intended for the poor, unless their poverty is so 
 extreme that they are unable to maintain them- 
 selves. As the Commissioners say in the above- 
 quoted passage, the difficulty is in applying this 
 to practice. How, in other words, are we to 
 distinguish destitution from mere poverty. 
 
 An answer is supplied by the passage which 
 follows the above quotation : 
 
 "A distribution of relief of money or goods, to be spent or 
 consumed by the pauper in his own house, is inconsistent 
 with the principle in question. Money or goods given to 
 paupers, to be spent or consumed by themselves as they may 
 think proper, is, in general, more acceptable than an equal value 
 earned as wages, inasmuch as it is not accompanied by the 
 painful condition of labour. 
 
 " Supposing, again, that the persons charged with the duty 
 of relieving the poor relieve them with money or goods at 
 their own houses, but attempt to exact some labour in return, 
 this mode of relief is found to be equally inconsistent with the 
 principle in question. If the remuneration of the labourer is 
 independent of his industry or good conduct ... he is 
 exempt from the motives which ordinarily operate upon the 
 independent labourer, and his condition resembles that of a 
 slave whom his master is bound to maintain, but whom he 
 cannot punish for idleness or misconduct. 
 
 " In order, therefore, to carry the above-mentioned principle 
 into effect, it is necessary that the pauper should be relieved, 
 not by giving him money or goods to be spent or consumed 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 121 
 
 in his own house, but by receiving him into a public establish- 
 ment. But a public establishment, if properly arranged, 
 necessarily secures to its inmates a larger amount of bodily 
 comfort than is enjoyed by an ordinary independent labourer 
 in his own dwelling. For example, an inmate of a well- 
 appointed Union Workhouse lives in rooms more spacious, 
 better ventilated, and better warmed; his meals are better 
 and more regularly served ; he is more warmly clad, and he is 
 better attended on in sickness, than if he were in his own 
 cottage ; moreover, all these things are supplied to him with 
 perfect regularity, and without any forethought or anxiety on 
 his part. Thus far, relief in a public establishment violates 
 the principle above adverted to, and places the pauper in a 
 more eligible condition than the independent labourer. And 
 yet humanity demands that all the bodily wants of the inmates 
 of a public establishment should be amply provided for. The 
 only expedient, therefore, for accomplishing the end in view 
 which humanity permits, is to subject the pauper inmate of a 
 public establishment to such a system of labour, discipline, 
 and restraint as shall be sufficient to outweigh, in his estima- 
 tion, the advantages which he derives from the bodily comforts 
 which he enjoys. This is the only mode, consistent with 
 humanity, of rendering the condition of the pauper less 
 eligible than that of the independent labourer, and upon 
 this principle the English Union Workhouses have been 
 organised." 
 
 The Report then goes on : 
 
 " With regard to the aged and infirm, however, there is a 
 strong disposition, on the part of a portion of the public, so 
 to modify the arrangements of these establishments as to 
 place them on the footing of almshouses. The consequences 
 which would flow from this change have only to be pointed 
 out to show its inexpediency and its danger. If the condition 
 of the inmates of a workhouse were to be so regulated as to 
 invite the aged and infirm of the labouring class to take refuge 
 
122 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 in it, it would immediately be useless as a test between 
 indigence and indolence or fraud. It would no longer 
 operate as an inducement to the young and healthy to 
 provide support for their later years, or as a stimulus to 
 them, while they have the means, to support their aged 
 parents and relatives." 
 
 It would be difficult to state the objections 
 to outdoor relief more forcibly, and this is a 
 statement of principles which we prefer to any 
 expressions of a contrary tenor which may 
 here and there be discovered in the writings of 
 the Commissioners. If these views had been 
 shared by the local administrators, there can be 
 no doubt that out-door relief would have come 
 to an end long ago ; but, as we all know, 
 that has not happened. 
 
 The violent opposition which had assailed 
 the three Commissioners disappeared when the 
 Poor Law Board was appointed in 1847. The 
 period which followed may be described as a 
 period of marking time. The Board published 
 short reports, and endeavoured to avoid con- 
 troversy. Its energies were directed to getting 
 rid of some of the abuses of Removal, also to 
 pushing the authority of the central office into 
 places where there were local Acts. The most 
 important legislation of the period was the 
 Union Chargeability Act, 1865. Hitherto, in 
 as much as the permissive clauses in the Act 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 123 
 
 of 1834 had only been utilised in one or two 
 cases, there had been continued a separate 
 parochial chargeability even for those parishes 
 which were combined in Unions. Though 
 the Union was the administrative unit, the 
 chargeability was still parochial. This weighed 
 very heavily on the poorer parishes, and 
 gave rise to very undesirable practices with 
 regard to cottage property. In what were 
 called close parishes, i.e. parishes owned by 
 one or two like-minded owners, in order to 
 avoid liability for the relief of the poorer class 
 of inhabitants, the building of cottages was 
 curtailed, and the poor were driven into ad- 
 joining parishes, where, by this means, both 
 rents and rates were unduly raised. This 
 system was now swept away, and the Union, 
 which had been the area of administration, 
 became also the area of chargeability. 
 
 These, however, are technical details, and 
 the scale on which we are considering the subject 
 obliges us to pass over without notice many 
 episodes of importance. It is more interesting 
 and instructive to confine our attention to the 
 different views which from time to time pre- 
 vailed as to the principles of Public Relief. 
 We therefore pass on to the new departure 
 which dates from 1867-1870. 
 
I2 4 -PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 The Central Board ceased to be aggressive 
 in 1847, and a period of acquiescence followed. 
 About 1867, a fresh attempt was made to arouse 
 interest in the scientific treatment of pauperism. 
 Marking time was for the moment discontinued. 
 
 The principle of the English Union Workhouse 
 and its twofold purpose, as set out a few pages 
 back, was again prominently brought into notice. 
 By improved institutional treatment, instantane- 
 ous, appropriate and adequate relief was to be 
 insured in each case. At the same time, such 
 a measure of discipline and confinement was to 
 be preserved, that though adequate, the relief 
 given was still to make for dispauperisation. 
 In this connection we should mention Gathorne 
 Hardy's Act of 1867. This applied to London 
 only. It created the Metropolitan Asylums 
 Board, and introduced the Common Poor Fund 
 system, with the view of encouraging guardians 
 in the poorer unions to incur adequate expendi- 
 ture. By the Metropolitan Poor Amendment 
 Act of 1870, the chargeability of the indoor poor 
 in London Unions was to the extent of 5d. per 
 head per diem transferred to the Metropolitan 
 Common Poor Fund, a common rate levied on 
 all London. This humanitarian side of Poor 
 Law reform has been pushed forward with com- 
 parative ease. Poor Law infirmaries, with their 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 125 
 
 staff of doctors and nurses, asylums, schools, 
 etc., are lavishly, if not efficiently, carried on. 
 
 At the same time, the other, the more difficult 
 and unpopular side of sound Poor Law policy, 
 was not ignored. 
 
 In 1869, Mr Goschen, then President of the 
 Poor Law Board, issued a Minute entitled, " Relief 
 to the Poor in the Metropolis." This document 
 urged greater care in the administration of out- 
 door relief, and the desirability of co-operation 
 between the Poor Law authorities and the re- 
 presentatives of voluntary charity. The subject 
 was taken up by the inspectors of the Board. 
 Mr Woodhouse and Mr (afterwards Sir) Henry 
 Longley published very instructive reports as to 
 the mischief done, both in country and town, by 
 the normal administration of outdoor relief. 
 Professor Fawcett, in 1870, published his Cam- 
 bridge lectures on Pauperism, in which he 
 strenuously advocated the abolition of outdoor 
 relief. 
 
 As a result of this discussion, several Boards 
 of Guardians determined to make an attempt 
 to carry out the principles of the Poor Law 
 Commissioners to their logical conclusion. In 
 some half-a-dozen Unions the experiment has 
 accordingly been made of administering our 
 English Poor Law without any recourse to out- 
 
126 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 door relief. The experiment has now gone on 
 for about thirty years in several of these Unions. 
 By those who are responsible, the experiment 
 has been declared successful. This verdict has 
 been confirmed, and the policy pursued recom- 
 mended by the Reports of the Local Govern- 
 ment Board and of its inspectors, and by more 
 than one Parliamentary inquiry. The story has 
 often been told, and I will not advert to it at 
 any length here. 
 
 The following is the statistical record of what 
 has happened in Whitechapel : 
 
 In the sixth week of the quarter ended Lady-Day 1870, 
 there were 1410 indoor paupers, 5339 outdoor, 6758 total. 
 
 Same period 1900 1510 indoor paupers, 23 outdoor, 1533 
 total. 
 
 In Bradfield, in 1871, on ist January, there were 
 
 OUTDOOR. INDOOR. TOTAL. 
 
 -Q f i pauper to every 
 
 999 259 1258 < * 
 
 I 13 inhabitants. 
 
 On ist January 1900 
 
 OUTDOOR. INDOOR. TOTAL. 
 
 is 121 i 39 / ' p au .p er to ever y 
 
 I 129 inhabitants. 
 
 Roughly speaking, in these two unions, 
 pauperism has been reduced to one-fourth and 
 one-ninth of its earlier proportions. 
 
 This, I maintain, is exactly what we might 
 expect from the precedents and arguments which 
 have been narrated. 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 127 
 
 In 1834, the terrible burden of pauperism 
 was relieved by a policy which made the able- 
 bodied man responsible for his able-bodied period 
 of life. The surplus population, which had 
 seemed so burdensome, had been, almost at 
 once, converted into valuable and independent 
 labour force, a source of national and individual 
 wealth. It was pointed out at the time by one, 
 who bitterly opposed the new law, that an able- 
 bodied labouring population, which, as a rule, was 
 independent and fully employed, would be well 
 able to minister to its own needs in those seasons 
 when it was not able-bodied. The Poor Law 
 Commissioners also, a body of men more 
 profoundly versed than any others in the 
 theory and practice of the art of social healing, 
 had declared in the most explicit manner, that, 
 by making the condition of the pauper less 
 eligible than that of the independent, progress 
 in dispauperisation could be confidently expected. 
 They had added, moreover, the self-evident 
 corollary that adequate relief, granted gratuit- 
 ously to a pauper in his own home, does, in a 
 material sense, put that pauper in a better 
 position than his independent neighbour, who 
 obtains an adequate maintenance only by pain- 
 ful labour, by abstinence and self-sacrifice. 
 
 And now again, from 1870 onwards, as might 
 
128 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 have been expected, in every recorded experi- 
 ment based on a further and more thorough 
 appreciation of this principle, dispauperisation 
 has resulted in a most marked degree. 
 
 I cannot myself conceive any proof more 
 cogent and more unanswerable. These views 
 have, it is alleged, made some slight impression 
 on the ordinary practice. A diminution of 
 pauperism from four to two per cent, of the 
 population in the last thirty years is put forward 
 as a satisfactory rate of reduction. We must 
 be thankful for small mercies, but it is open to 
 us to remark that the improvement is so far 
 short of what might be, that the position, re- 
 latively to our increased wealth, is far from 
 satisfactory. These dispauperising experiments 
 have, as a rule, been made in places where 
 formerly the rate had been exceptionally heavy. 
 The two districts above-mentioned, from a variety 
 of reasons, were the resort of a very poor 
 population, the one, a poor district in a large 
 town, the other, an agricultural union, remote 
 from the manufacturing industry of the land. 
 The effect of dispauperising measures, pursued 
 in these unpromising localities, has been neutra- 
 lised by the permanence of the older methods 
 of administration in districts, in which, owing 
 to more favourable economic surroundings, a 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 129 
 
 much more wide-spread emancipation would 
 certainly have been secured by a more en- 
 lightened policy. The statistical improvement, 
 which can be recorded throughout the country 
 generally, is due to the growth of the indepen- 
 dent industrial population, and not to a decrease 
 of pauperism. The fact that free industrial 
 society is more absorbent of population than our 
 pauper system is matter for congratulation, but 
 it is no answer to those who affirm that our 
 pauper system is still retentive and absorbent 
 of population to a degree that is unnecessary 
 and therefore malignant. 
 
 The reason why so little progress has been 
 made is obvious. It is precisely that anticipated 
 by Mr Chadwick. This is a question requiring 
 scientific treatment, and the New Poor Law is 
 an instrument which, if properly used, enables 
 the local administrator to relieve adequately, 
 and yet to dispauperise. The local administrator, 
 with only a few exceptions, has never accepted 
 this view of his duties, and the reformation 
 derived from the Act has fallen far short of 
 the legitimate expectation of its authors. 
 
 It is not for me to say that Mr Chadwick's 
 idea, of administering by a responsible civil service 
 a fund raised locally, was a practicable one. 
 
 My object is only to point out that his plan 
 
 i 
 
130 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 was mutilated, and that an instrument, the in- 
 stitutional system of relief authorised by the 
 New Poor Law,* has not in the hands of the 
 local empirics been used in the way its authors 
 intended. If we read attentively the indictment 
 which the Report of 1834 laid against vestries 
 and other local administrators, we shall, I think, 
 be forced to the opinion that much of it is still 
 applicable to our local administration of the 
 Poor Law. 
 
 As it is, people who believe (on grounds 
 which I have endeavoured to explain, and which 
 might be indefinitely amplified and strengthened) 
 that dispauperisation, a more or less complete 
 emancipation of the poor from parochial depend- 
 ence, is not only possible but easy, have to 
 appeal to the local administrator. I have no 
 wish to say anything disparaging of the local 
 guardian, but I do not think that I am going 
 at all beyond the truth when I say that he is 
 not readily disposed to study this question in its 
 historical and theoretical aspects. No one who 
 has studied Poor Law electioneering literature 
 can have much doubt of this. Very seldom is 
 any definite policy put forward. Those who are 
 in favour of a policy of dispauperisation are few, 
 and knowing that this policy is unpopular, wisely 
 
 * See note on p. 41 as to meaning of the term "Workhouse Test." 
 
IT.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 131 
 
 say nothing. The general impression left is that 
 the majority of the candidates are attracted by 
 the distinction which public office confers, and 
 that very few indeed have any knowledge of or 
 interest in the 'grave economic forces by which 
 their work is controlled. Occasionally the can- 
 didate descends to promises of outdoor relief, 
 and plenty of it. More generally the addresses 
 are remarkable for their irrelevancy. Candidates 
 ask to be elected because they are Liberals or 
 Conservatives, or because they have lived in the 
 parish for many years, or because they are in 
 favour of efficiency and economy which, if 
 relevant, is also extremely vague. It is generally 
 assumed that any fool can administer the Poor 
 Law. 
 
 Now, if there be any truth in the idea that 
 the duties of a Poor Law Guardian, like the 
 duties of a physician, have to be acquired by 
 study, I think we must admit that the situation 
 is not altogether satisfactory. If it was merely 
 a question of administering a system rigidly 
 prescribed by law, there would be no need of 
 special training for the Poor Law Guardian. 
 This, of course, is not the case. Within the 
 discretion, allowed by the law and by the orders 
 of the Local Government Board, there is room 
 for such diversity of action, that whole districts 
 
132 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 can be made or marred, in respect of dis- 
 pauperisation, by the caprice of a local Board 
 of Guardians. 
 
 It is, however, to this somewhat fortuitous 
 concourse of people who are elected as Poor Law 
 Guardians that arguments have to be addressed. 
 Here one is met by the difficulty that the 
 majority of those to be addressed are not ac- 
 cessible to argument. It is not for them to 
 argue, they seem to say, but to administer the 
 law within the full limits of the licence permitted 
 by the statutes and orders which govern the 
 subject. It requires a very strong conviction of 
 the value of the reforms indicated to induce 
 men or women to face the unpopularity involved. 
 Persons desirous of pursuing a policy of emanci- 
 pation must be prepared for much misrepresenta- 
 tion and abuse. The chances of such success as 
 would compensate are very slight under present 
 conditions. We have fallen back again to the 
 policy of marking time. The arguments put 
 forward against dispauperisation by the methods 
 here advocated are for the most part inarticulate. 
 The mute prejudice which is practically in 
 possession of the machinery of the law is quite 
 unassailable. It occasionally puts forth an 
 argument which is eagerly refuted, but its 
 equanimity is not the least ruffled, and things 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 133 
 
 go on in their old way. We may notice some 
 of these arguments, though we know it is use- 
 less. They generally arrange themselves in two 
 divisions. The first asserts that economy de- 
 mands the use of outdoor relief. 
 
 We can get rid of an applicant, they say, for 
 2s. 6d. outdoor relief, whereas if he comes into 
 the house, he will cost us 6s. or 8s. The answer 
 to this is, that, even if it were true, we want to 
 do what is best for the poor, not what is cheapest. 
 Further, ten will apply for and accept 2S. 6d., 
 as against one who will accept an offer of the 
 house a consideration which effectually disposes 
 of the argument from economy. 
 
 The second class of objection (and it takes 
 many shapes) is that the policy of restriction is 
 cruel to the poor. 
 
 Of course, if we assume that there is no 
 prospect or possibility of a further dissociation of 
 the poor from the poor rate, it would be more 
 difficult to meet this argument ; but I doubt if 
 any one is so pessimistic as to attribute per- 
 manence to the existing relations of the poor to 
 the poor rate. Taking a sober and unim- 
 passioned view of the progress made in the 
 past, we contend that there is no reason to 
 despair of the ultimate complete emancipation of 
 the poor. And, that being so, we must not 
 
i 3 4 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 shrink from taking the necessary steps to secure 
 their independence. 
 
 I can myself see no flaw in the argument, 
 based on history and actual experiment, which 
 promises complete success to wise measures of 
 dispauperisation. The difficulty is that very few 
 administrators have sufficiently considered the 
 history and theory of the subject, so as to be 
 able to look beyond the apparent hardship to 
 the individual cases with which they have to 
 deal. It is, to my mind, as if the whole art 
 and practice of surgery had been brought to a 
 standstill, because the use of the surgeon's 
 knife clearly, in many cases, inflicts pain. 
 
 The difficulty raised, on the ground of the 
 alleged inhumanity of the stricter system, is one 
 entitled to the utmost consideration. The argu- 
 ment from the hardship of the particular case 
 appeals very strongly even to those whom their 
 opponents are wont to call doctrinaires, and in 
 most instances it will be found that the so-called 
 doctrinaire advocates of restriction are willing to 
 take some personal responsibility to deal by 
 voluntary effort with exceptional applications. 
 In this way, hard cases are not allowed to make 
 bad law, and it is very important to add that, 
 for reasons which will be given later, the liability 
 assumed by such private persons has, in the 
 
IV.] 
 
 135 
 
 event, proved to be infinitesimal both in extent 
 and amount. Still we must admit a feeling of 
 great sympathy with those who say, " The general 
 argument in favour of a stricter administration 
 is all very well, but here is the case of old Mrs 
 Jones, whose latter days have been made very 
 happy by receipt of outdoor relief." 
 
 I submit, however, that we must regard the 
 question from a larger point of view. If, as I 
 presume will be conceded, it is desirable that the 
 aged of the labouring class should be maintained 
 by a provision made by themselves or by those 
 friends and relatives on whom they have a 
 natural claim, as is the case in other ranks of 
 life, it is obvious that this consummation is in- 
 definitely postponed, so long as maintenance is 
 forthcoming on easy terms from the poor rate. 
 If we ask how it is that so many Mrs Jones are 
 left destitute at this particular period of their 
 lives, it is obvious that this is due to the inability 
 or neglect of some one to fulfil his or her re- 
 sponsibilities during the able-bodied period of 
 life. It may not be possible to distinguish in- 
 ability from neglect, but the result of legislating 
 as if the inability was general and absolute, has 
 had disastrous consequences to the independence 
 of the poor. When an earlier generation, in 
 1834, demanded that the able-bodied man should 
 
136 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 be held responsible for his able-bodied period of 
 life, and if not that he should accept his relief 
 under the institutional test, the same objection 
 was raised. It was argued that it was cruel to 
 oblige him to meet the responsibility. The result 
 has proved that this assumption was erroneous. 
 The failure to provide, which unfortunately is 
 characteristic not only of a few individuals, but 
 of a class, is not probably the result of inability 
 or of a neglect that is in any sense culpable. It 
 is the result of a perfectly common-sense calcula- 
 tion that this is a risk provided for by a public 
 rate. If this solution was a happy one for those 
 most nearly concerned, we might be content to 
 let the matter rest, but it is not. The abnegation 
 and evasion of personal responsibility for their 
 own maintenance at any period of life can not 
 be arranged for systematically as it is at present, 
 without causing grave economic injury to the 
 poor. 
 
 The expectancy of relief on easy terms has 
 been an unbroken tradition for many genera- 
 tions, yet, despite the greater independence of 
 the labourer secured for him by the Poor Law 
 Amendment Act of 1834, despite better wages 
 and better conditions of toil generally, there still 
 remains an artificial and unnecessary dependence 
 
iv.] ADMINISTRATION OF NEW POOR LAW 137 
 
 on the poor rate for those things which the poor 
 rate will supply on eligible terms. 
 
 What we have to do in order to complete the 
 emancipation of the labourer is to break this 
 tradition. We must imitate the courage of the 
 reformers of 1834, and not be deterred by the 
 fear of undue hardship to the passing generation. 
 It must be remembered that hardship is un- 
 fortunately inevitable in the life of the poor. It 
 is not a choice between a system which entirely 
 removes hardship and another that does not. 
 The evidence is conclusive that where outdoor 
 relief is given readily, the usual tendency is for 
 the guardians to shrink from giving adequate 
 relief. Under such a system applications are 
 rapidly multiplied, relations and friends, who 
 might otherwise assist, withdraw into the back- 
 ground, and an ever-increasing amount of dis- 
 appointment and discontent, as well as much 
 hardship, is the result. The system is not even a 
 safeguard against occasional deaths from starva- 
 tion. Coroners' juries have returned verdicts of 
 death from starvation in the case of persons who 
 were actually at the time in receipt of outdoor 
 relief. Paupers, moreover, know that outdoor 
 relief is procurable. A refusal is rarely re- 
 garded as final, and unfortunate applicants are 
 induced to linger on, declining the offer of indoor 
 
138 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. iv. 
 
 relief, in the hope that their importunity will at 
 length prevail. The hardship of this uncertainty 
 is very real. 
 
 On the other hand, institutional relief is cer- 
 tainly adequate, while it throws the responsibility of 
 accepting parish relief on the poor person, and re- 
 lieves him from the partiality and injustice which, 
 even when guardians are most desirous to be fair, 
 must frequently occur. The greater humanity 
 of the strict system, however, consists in the fact 
 that it deliberately is aiming at placing the poor 
 on a higher level of existence altogether. There 
 is every reason to believe, moreover, that its 
 influence is conducive to that end. 
 
 Our last argument is, that if there are hard 
 cases, a point which we do not wish to deny, they 
 should be dealt with by voluntary action, and not 
 strained in order to make bad law. The matter 
 of the relation of voluntary agencies of Relief 
 to the legal machinery of the Poor Law, must, 
 however, be reserved for the next chapter. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 THE RELATION BETWEEN LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY 
 AGENCIES OF RELIEF 
 
 HITHERTO we have discussed principally the legal 
 side of our Public Relief system. In this chapter 
 we have to include in our survey the relief given 
 by public charity. At the outset, I think it will 
 be convenient to make a distinction. Relief 
 arising from endowed charitable funds, from 
 subscriptions gathered by institutions and societies, 
 and from the gifts of well-to-do people made 
 to persons who are not known to them, otherwise 
 than as persons requiring assistance, I propose 
 to call Public Charity. The term private charity, 
 I propose to apply to the good offices which pass 
 between relations, friends, neighbours, employer 
 and employed, acts of personal kindness and help 
 which cannot with advantage be systematised 
 and controlled by considerations of public policy. 
 It is a matter of considerable domestic interest 
 how far it is wise for a man to help a member of 
 his own family, an old servant, a poor neighbour 
 
 139 
 
1 40 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 or tenant, whose conduct may not have been 
 exemplary, and who very possibly may be en- 
 couraged by such help to persevere in reckless 
 courses. It is, however, very important for 
 us to observe that the presence of the personal 
 element is a factor differentiating such action from 
 what I prefer to call Public Chanty. I do 
 not make this distinction with any desire to 
 contract the answer to be given to the 
 question : Who is my Neighbour ? On the 
 contrary, I assume that we regard the whole 
 world as our neighbour, and that our desire is to 
 do, according to our ability, what is kindest and 
 best for all. That being so, we have to recognise 
 that personal relationship and personal inter- 
 course confers certain privileges, and one is that 
 acts of personal kindness and help may pass 
 freely without loss of self-respect on either side, 
 between persons who are, or have been, bound 
 together by some personal tie. When, however, 
 subscriptions are demanded on behalf of those 
 with whom we have no personal connection, 
 those who wish to consider the poor, and to 
 be wise as well as good neighbours, must 
 recognise that the question has now become 
 one of public policy. The personal element, 
 which, like the antiseptic spray, frees acts of 
 private charity from poisonous after-effects, is 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 141 
 
 here absent, and our conduct must be governed 
 by other considerations. 
 
 We may be justified in overlooking social 
 infirmities and errors in some one who has a 
 personal claim on us, till seventy times seven, but 
 it is generally recognised that, even in such cases, 
 probably the kindest, certainly the most self- 
 sacrificing, course to follow is to make any relief 
 given subservient to some scheme of reclamation 
 of conduct and character. This can, as a rule, 
 only be done by exercise of personal influence. 
 The amount of personal influence at one man's 
 disposal is limited, and when he wishes his alms 
 to go beyond the sphere of his own personal 
 surroundings, he must look about for other in- 
 fluences to correct the enervating and dangerous 
 properties which are inherent in all forms of 
 social dependence. 
 
 When a man becomes a subscriber to, and an 
 administrator of, public charity, he must have 
 regard to the principles of social justice ; and 
 knowing that the reformatory power of personal 
 influence cannot wholly safeguard the administra- 
 tion of such funds, he must occasionally stand 
 aside and allow the corrective discipline which 
 follows on social error to exert its purifying and 
 educative influence. 
 
 It is, of course, difficult, perhaps impossible, 
 
i 4 t PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 to draw a clearly defined line at the point where 
 the personal element grows so faint as to be 
 no longer wholesomely operative and preventative 
 of the sinister effects of dependence. The only 
 remark to be made is, that the good neighbour is 
 inclined to stretch a point, and by personal 
 supervision make his gifts to his poorer neigh- 
 bours really neighbourly and personal in their 
 character. He will not, of course, be blind to the 
 injury that may be done to persons of weak 
 character by the over-indulgence of their friends, 
 but giving candid and careful consideration to the 
 subject, he will find, that private charity is 
 helpful, just as far as, and no further than, it can 
 be followed by personal interest and supervision, 
 and that, when he begins to get his charitable 
 "diligence" done vicariously through societies 
 and institutions (as of course many busy and rich 
 men must do), his conduct becomes a question of 
 public policy, and must be guided by considera- 
 tions which apply to the whole problem of Public 
 Relief. 
 
 This distinction which I have drawn is, I 
 venture to think, of some importance, and it has 
 not been sufficiently realised in the discussion of 
 the subject. If borne in mind, it will explain a 
 good deal that otherwise may appear puzzling. 
 
 The ideal method of relief would of course be 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 143 
 
 that there should be no system of Public Relief at 
 all, and that the relief of the unfortunate should 
 be attained by a more perfect development of the 
 natural benevolence which is inherent in family, 
 social and industrial relationships. With an 
 abolition of public systems of relief, the burden 
 to fall on this private benevolence would be much 
 lightened by the more rapid development of the 
 self- regarding virtue of thrift, mainly, in all 
 probability, by the expedient of insurance in many 
 forms. It may seem a bold assertion to make, 
 but this consummation is not, perhaps, so far out 
 of our reach as we generally suppose. 
 
 The only body as far as I am aware, which 
 has made it its object to influence and improve 
 the administration of relief, not itself being a 
 relief agency, is the Charity Organisation 
 Society, and in the work which it is attempting 
 to do, we may see, I think, the relevancy of this 
 distinction between private and public charity 
 appearing in various ways. 
 
 When an application for relief is made to this 
 Society, its first object is to discover whether 
 there is any one on whom the applicant has some 
 personal claim. The most successful way of 
 disposing of an application for relief is to find 
 some one who is willing to undertake to do what 
 is necessary on personal grounds. 
 
144 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 As a rule, however, when an applicant has 
 to apply to a public institution, with a view 
 of discovering for him persons on whom he 
 has a natural claim, there either are no such 
 persons, or they have been exhausted and wearied 
 out. In other words, the case in question is 
 obviously drifting away from the resources of 
 private charity, and is rapidly becoming one 
 which, if it is to be dealt with at all, must be 
 dealt with by public charity or by the Poor Law. 
 As far as possible, however, the Society tries to 
 have each application met by private charity, in 
 the belief that the personal element which is 
 thereby introduced will restrict to a minimum the 
 enervating influence of all relief. When we have 
 to look further afield and call in the aid of in- 
 stitutions and strangers, this personal element 
 can only be retained with great difficulty, and by 
 such artificial and doubtful means as appointing a 
 visitor for the occasion. The Society recognises 
 very fully the value of the personal element, but 
 recognises also that this is not always available. 
 
 Again, I notice, there is a disposition among 
 the members of the Society to resent the use of 
 the term " deserving " and "undeserving." These 
 words, they say, ought not to be used as relevant 
 to the business of relief. The answer which 
 may be wisely given to an applicant for relief 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 145 
 
 does not turn on desert, but on the means 
 and resources which are at the administrator's 
 disposal for dealing with the particular form 
 of distress. 
 
 Let us take an extreme instance. A man 
 whom, on inquiry, we find to be a habitual 
 drunkard applies for relief. Now if the adminis- 
 trator has at his beck and call a number of 
 devoted persons who make it their business to 
 keep the habitual drunkard sober and to labour 
 for his reformation, he is justified in referring his 
 drunkard to one or more of such persons ; and 
 relief and kindness, coupled with strict super- 
 vision, might perhaps be part of the treatment 
 which would be followed. As far as I know, 
 however, there is no such body of reformers, and 
 it is very questionable whether the task of reclaim- 
 ing the habitual drunkard can be usefully under- 
 taken in this way. What I want to point out is 
 that if the administrator of charitable funds de- 
 clines to do anything for such a man, it is not 
 because he is undeserving, but because he (the 
 administrator) has no means at his disposal to 
 effect the necessary reformation of character. 
 The forlorn hope that there is for such a man 
 is that the sharp suffering which he brings on 
 himself and family may at the eleventh hour pull 
 
 him up and set him on better courses. This is 
 
 K 
 
1 46 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the only way in which relief is likely to reach 
 him ; and from the administrator's point of view, 
 the best way to give permanent relief may be to 
 refuse the temporary relief which is asked for. 
 
 There are two aspects, therefore, to the work 
 of those who seek to organise charitable relief in 
 the best possible way. On the one hand, we 
 are deeply committed to a belief in the efficacy 
 of personal kindness, personal sympathy, and in 
 the need of cultivating the benevolence which 
 naturally arises in family, social and industrial 
 intercourse. There is no limit to the difficult 
 experiments which may be tried within this sphere 
 of personal influence. Even that most difficult 
 enterprise, the reclaiming of the drunkard, may 
 be successfully attempted. On the other hand, 
 the wise administrator of charitable funds must 
 recognise that there comes a point, where it is 
 not always possible to evoke the spontaneous 
 benevolence that is personal, and therefore 
 wholesome, between the applicant and the giver 
 of relief; and that when, as is then necessary, 
 appeal is made to public charity, a vast number 
 of considerations arise which do not apply to 
 the good offices which pass between persons, who 
 may be described as friends. 
 
 At once, when we are dealing with public 
 charity, there presents itself to our minds the 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 147 
 
 whole history of the Old Poor Law, and the hideous 
 abuses which resulted from too great a facility of 
 relief. It then becomes our duty to consider 
 charitable administration as an adjunct to the 
 legal agency which has been created for the 
 same purpose. In our examination of Poor Law 
 administration we came to the conclusion that 
 the Poor Law was historically and economically 
 a continuation of older forms of servitude, which 
 were gradually yielding to more honourable con- 
 ditions ; that the progressive emancipation, begun 
 in 1834, was capable of being accelerated and 
 extended with every prospect of success ; that 
 by a policy of careful and well-timed restriction 
 of relief, a more or less complete independence 
 could be brought within the reach of the manual 
 labouring class ; and also that the hard cases, 
 which were apt to be made precedents for bad law, 
 could be best met by voluntary effort. 
 
 It seems to follow, therefore, first, that careful 
 administration of charitable funds is necessary, 
 because a careless administration may produce on 
 a minor scale the evils which resulted from a 
 careless and unwise administration of legal funds ; 
 and secondly, that a definite function is suggested 
 for charitable agencies in the struggle for the 
 emancipation of the poor from dependence on 
 public relief. 
 
148 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 I have said thus much by way of distinguish- 
 ing private and public charity, as I wish to avoid 
 the reproach of seeming to undervalue a quality 
 which is undoubtedly a Christian virtue. No one 
 wishes to put a stop to acts of kindness passing 
 between rich and poor, but it is necessary to point 
 out that, even in a man's own family, kindness 
 may degenerate into indulgence, with a result most 
 detrimental to the objects which he has in view. 
 Each man, as regards his own family, must judge 
 for himself at what point the sterner require- 
 ments of justice should supersede the more indul- 
 gent dictates of affection. He has, or he can insist 
 v on having, a full knowledge of the circumstances 
 of the case, and his own common sense must 
 guide him. The transaction is private, it evokes 
 gratitude and appeals to the recipient's better 
 nature, and no dangerous public precedent can be 
 established by any error that he may make. 
 
 On the other hand, when alms are given by 
 '* legal compulsion, or vicariously through charitable 
 institutions, there can be no gratitude. There is 
 no appreciation on the part of the recipient that 
 the aid given involves some sacrifice on the part 
 of the donor, and there is, therefore, no sense of 
 shame restrictive of renewed application. Every 
 act of public charity, moreover, becomes a 
 precedent. Private charity rightly enough goes 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 149 
 
 by favour, but in public charity the same treat- 
 ment must be meted out to all, and we have to 
 consider what would be the result of each act if it 
 had to be multiplied by thousands. 
 
 Setting aside, therefore, the region within 
 which a purely personal charity may be expected 
 to operate, and leaving it to the only form of 
 control which can apply to it, namely, the 
 common sense which each man carries about 
 with him in his own head, we pass to what 
 I have described as public charity, that is en- 
 dowed charities, subscription charities, and the 
 personal gifts which well-to-do persons are often 
 willing to make to individuals who otherwise are 
 strangers to them. 
 
 Obviously, the relation of this sort of charity 
 to the Poor Law is that it is a voluntary effort 
 to do that which the Poor Law is also doing, 
 and it is a plain matter of common sense that 
 when two or. more agencies are endeavouring 
 to do the same thing, some co-operation or 
 division of labour between them is desirable. 
 
 The object of Poor Law and charitable relief 
 is the same, viz., adequate and appropriate 
 relief of destitution, and that emancipation of 
 the pauper from the pauper habit, which we 
 have called dispauperisation. 
 
 First a few words as to the history of the 
 question which is for the most part modern. 
 
i5o PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 I called attention in the last chapter to Mr 
 Goschen's Minute of 1869, in which, as President 
 of the Poor Law Board, he urged the guardians 
 to invite the co-operation of charitable agencies in 
 the work of Public Relief. His action was no 
 doubt part of the same movement which came 
 from the life and labours of men like Edward 
 Denison, and the closer attention which their 
 example and influence gained for the subject of 
 Public Relief generally. Elsewhere this move- 
 ment resulted in the foundation of the London 
 Charity Organisation Society, a body which had 
 certain executive and administrative objects in 
 view, but whose principal service has been 
 the arousing more sustained and scientific 
 interest in the whole problem of Public Relief. 
 
 The terms of Mr Goschen's Minute were 
 somewhat tentative. It laid down the sound 
 maxim that Poor Law relief should only be 
 given to the " actually destitute." The weak 
 part of the Minute is that no practical means of 
 distinguishing the destitute from those who are 
 merely poor is suggested, and, in the absence of 
 this, the whole subject is left floundering about 
 amid vague generalities. The Poor Law Com- 
 missioners had long ago pointed out that the only 
 satisfactory test of destitution was an automatic 
 test. A man is destitute, if he is willing to re- 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 151 
 
 linquish the maintenance which he derives from 
 his own resources, in exchange for one which is 
 offered to him in a Poor Law establishment If 
 this, the only practicable test of destitution, is 
 accepted, it follows that the Poor Law should 
 confine itself to institutional relief, and that 
 domiciliary or outdoor relief should be left to 
 charitable agencies. 
 
 Mr Goschen's Minute does not definitely re- 
 commend this, and the answers to the Minute 
 which were sent in by various metropolitan 
 unions show how difficult, if not impossible, co- 
 operation is where no such rule is enforced. 
 Some boards write in approval of the suggestion, 
 and state that a beginning had been made. 
 Subsequent history proves that these begin- 
 nings, for the most part, came to nothing. 
 Other boards, such as that of the City of 
 London, say that they see- no necessity of 
 appealing for charitable co-operation. Notwith- 
 standing the law, and the orders of the Poor 
 Law Board which the Minute pointed out forbade 
 the purchase of tools, payment of rent, and 
 certain other forms of relief the city guardians 
 never shrink, they said, from giving all the 
 relief which they think desirable, and then, with 
 a complacency which is very characteristic, they 
 proceeded to attribute the permanence of the 
 
i 5 2 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 pauper habit, and the admitted demoralisation 
 alluded to in Mr Goschen's Minute, to " indis- 
 criminate charity," and to a Houseless Poor Act, 
 which did not recommend itself to the wisdom 
 of these city fathers. There is something highly 
 diverting in the City of London Guardians, as 
 at that time constituted, complaining of indis- 
 criminate relief. It is a case of the pot calling 
 the kettle black. If indiscriminate relief is a bad 
 thing, the predominant partners in the system of 
 indiscrimination, namely the guardians, are the 
 persons to bear the blame. 
 
 Comments from other boards are to this 
 effect : " We only do what the law allows, and, 
 unless the Poor Law Board is prepared to pre- 
 scribe our action more definitely, we intend to 
 use the powers of patronage which we possess." 
 
 The Minute had recommended that no 
 charitable relief should be given to persons in 
 receipt of Poor Law relief. That, the guardians 
 declare, would upset their whole system. The 
 outdoor relief given by them is not adequate, 
 and it is not intended to be adequate. One 
 board goes so far as to say that if they gave 
 adequate relief, no body of rate-payers could 
 stand it. As for the recommendation that relief 
 should not be given in aid of wages, they find 
 this also absurd and impracticable. All relief, 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 153 
 
 they quite truly point out, is in aid of wages. 
 This seems to be Mr Scrope's point arising in 
 a new form ; if we have, or are aiming at having, 
 an independent wage-earning class, their wages 
 clearly must provide for all emergencies. We 
 may hold with Mr Scrope that independent wage- 
 earners will be equal to this responsibility, but 
 these Poor Law guardians did not think so, and 
 saw no reason why they should not give out- 
 door Poor Law relief in aid of wages. In effect 
 their answer to this recommendation of the 
 Minute is : "It is absurd to tell us not to give 
 relief in aid of wages. All relief is in aid of 
 wages, and you must give us some more precise 
 indication of the distinction you wish to draw, 
 for we can see none." 
 
 If Mr Goschen had cared to dot the i's of 
 his Minute, he would have said, "Adopt an 
 automatic distinction. Relief, in aid of the 
 objects which wages ought to provide, you must 
 give, but give it under an institutional test the 
 offer of maintenance in a Poor Law establish- 
 ment." 
 
 These dialectical passages on paper between 
 the Board and its subjects came to little ; but in 
 three London unions where by some strange 
 accident the boards were captured by men 
 anxious to try a scientific policy Whitechapel, 
 
154 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 Stepney, St George in the East, the outdoor relief 
 system was about this time brought practically to 
 a close. To this policy it has generally been 
 supposed that the local Charity Organisation 
 Society gave great assistance. The statement, 
 however, requires some qualification. In the 
 earlier stages of the reform the organisation of 
 the Society was very incomplete. One committee 
 was responsible for the whole of the East End of 
 London, an unmanageably large area. The 
 reform in every case was originated by the 
 guardians themselves. The Society, as represen- 
 tative of voluntary charitable funds, was pledged 
 to nothing but to the general proposition that, if 
 the guardians adopted a definite and well under- 
 stood division of labour, there would necessarily 
 be a better and more concentrated application of 
 voluntary funds. Its services, moreover, were 
 promised not to raise fresh funds, but to promote 
 the better administration of existing funds, which 
 existed, it was thought, in sufficient quantity 
 to meet all demand. We shall see presently that 
 the burden imposed on the charitable agencies of 
 the district by the discontinuance of outdoor relief 
 was not heavy. 
 
 The question is often asked (it may have 
 occurred to some of my readers, though the 
 answer, I hope, is so obvious that it is already 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 155 
 
 plain to them) : What is the advantage of 
 transferring the liability for domiciliary or out- 
 door relief from a legal to a voluntary source 
 of income? And the objection is superadded, 
 that the operation throws the burden on the liberal 
 and open-handed, and relieves the churlish cur- 
 mudgeon. No one wishes, of course, to favour 
 the churlish curmudgeon, if there be such a 
 person ; but we must not, for the sake of trounc- 
 ing some unknown and possibly non-existent 
 sinner, fasten on the poor of this country a 
 system of legal relief which has been proved 
 detrimental to their best interests. We proposed 
 two points as conclusive tests of a good system 
 of Public Relief: first, that it should make 
 for dispauperisation ; second, that it should be 
 adequate. Let us submit the point at issue to 
 these tests. 
 
 First, as to dispauperisation. A charitable 
 fund, in so much as it is less extensive, less widely 
 advertised, and not to be claimed as a right, 
 exercises much less influence and fascination over 
 the mind and conduct of the poor than a fund 
 derived from a public rate, which is often re- 
 presented as a provision to which they have a 
 right. All experience shows that the poor do not 
 apply with the same eagerness and importunity 
 to charitable as to legal sources of relief. The 
 
156 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 decreased facility for obtaining legal relief, re- 
 sulting from a discontinuance of outdoor relief, 
 throws a certain number of persons on their own 
 resources. This, every precedent in Poor Law 
 history shows, is the first step to reform. What 
 is perhaps more important, it removes pros- 
 pectively, in the interest of all future genera- 
 tions, from the young and able-bodied, the 
 expectation that at all crises of life relief from 
 an ubiquitous poor rate on favourable terms may 
 confidently be reckoned on. What, then, will 
 become of the burden that formerly was carried 
 by the poor rate? It will not be taken up, so 
 experience has proved, by charitable agencies. 
 The increase of charitable expenditure in the 
 three East End Unions has been infinitesimal, if 
 indeed there has been any increase at all. In 
 one union, where some .14,000 was being 
 yearly expended in outdoor relief, the recorded 
 expenditure of the representative charitable 
 agencies was only a few hundreds, and this not 
 money for the first time brought into the district. 
 Nor will the burden remain on the poor rate in 
 another form, for there has been no increase in 
 the number of persons accepting indoor relief. 
 The people have not been driven into the work- 
 house. Such fluctuation in the numbers of the 
 indoor paupers as has since occurred may with 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 157 
 
 confidence be assigned to attractive improve- 
 ments in the internal management of the poor 
 law establishments generally. The greater part 
 of the previous burden (and under favourable con- 
 ditions, as at Bradfield, a country union isolated 
 from the temptations of a great town, an in- 
 creasingly greater part) is taken up by an 
 extension of self-maintenance, by the growth of 
 more provident habits, by a more adequate sense 
 of personal responsibility, by the better discharge 
 of filial duty, by a fuller exercise of the virtue 
 of neighbourliness among all classes. Only a 
 very small margin of responsibility is, in the 
 event, left to fall on the voluntary agencies 
 of relief. Such complaint as has arisen has been 
 evoked by the action of outside agitators. In 
 most of the unions which have adopted the 
 system, the Poor Law elections have sent back for 
 thirty years the same or a like-minded board, 
 and there can therefore be no ground for saying 
 that great hardship has been caused, or that the 
 charitable agencies have failed in their under- 
 taking to intervene in favour of the " hard 
 cases." Even if the charitable agencies had in 
 some respects failed, the increased independence 
 of the poor the first step in a rise to more 
 material prosperity should in itself be sufficient 
 to vindicate the wisdom of the reform. 
 
158 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND ICHAP. 
 
 Then, as to the second test that of adequacy 
 it is enough to say that no form of relief can 
 be more adequate than one which has transferred, 
 and is transferring, the poorer population from 
 maintenance on a rate to self-maintenance. The 
 most adequate and permanent form of relief that 
 can be conferred on any community is a method 
 of administration that extends, protects and 
 stimulates the independence of the poorer class. 
 Nor is there any evidence to show that it has 
 increased the hardship of those who still remain 
 below the level of self-support. The term work- 
 house is really a misnomer for the modern Poor 
 Law establishment. For the aged they are 
 asylums, for the sick they are hospitals, and for the 
 young they are schools. The assistance given, 
 in what have been termed hard cases, by 
 charitable agencies, is made more valuable by 
 the personal superintendence of sympathetic 
 almoners, and is much more easily adapted to 
 circumstances than the official action of public 
 authorities. Moreover, as has been pointed out 
 on an earlier page (p. 137), the alternative system 
 of out relief is much more liable to miscarriage 
 and inadequacy than the stricter system for 
 which we seek to obtain the co-operation and 
 support of an intelligent administration of chari- 
 table funds. 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 159 
 
 When the Poor Law authorities determine to 
 restrict their operations, and to leave a definite 
 field to charitable agencies, a certain organisation 
 of charitable effort becomes inevitable ; and it 
 is important to notice the fact, and not to impute 
 too large a responsibility to a body like the 
 Charity Organisation Society. In places where 
 its work has been most useful, it is the result, not 
 the cause, of improved Poor Law administration. 
 
 At Bradfield, where the poor have been more 
 effectually emancipated from pauperism than 
 anywhere else, and in country unions where 
 reformed Poor Law administration has been 
 introduced, there has been no attempt to make a 
 systematic organisation of charitable effort. In 
 the country, rich and poor live in closer proximity 
 to each other. It is possible, therefore, for private 
 charity to go further afield, without the danger of 
 re-introducing the evils of indiscriminate public 
 relief, and for this reason an organisation of public 
 charity has been the less necessary. 
 
 This action on the part of the three East End 
 Unions is the most practical answer which has been 
 given to Mr Goschen's Circular ; and it may serve 
 to indicate the identity of the real difficulty of all 
 this problem, if we notice that the method adopted 
 is virtually the same as that suggested in the long 
 quotation set out on page 1 1 9 from the Con- 
 
160 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 tinuance Report of the Poor Law Commissioners. 
 In this, it will be remembered, they indicate where 
 the practical difficulty lies viz., How is the condi- 
 tion of the adequately relieved pauper to be made 
 inferior to that of the independent labourer of the 
 humblest class ? or, as it is otherwise stated, How 
 are we to distinguish between destitution that 
 condition where a man's own resources and the 
 good-will of his friends are unable to support him 
 and the poverty which, if it is to be relieved at all, 
 must be relieved by voluntary and eleemosynary 
 agencies? The answer given by the Commis- 
 sioners, and now by the practice of these reformed 
 boards, is that the inferiority must be imported by 
 the discipline and restraint of a public institution, 
 and that the responsibility of deciding where the 
 line is to be drawn between destitution and 
 poverty must be left to the applicant, who alone 
 can know when self-support is no longer possible, 
 and when it is necessary for him to accept 
 support in a public institution. 
 
 In view of the great development of indoor 
 relief not as a substitute for, but in addition to a 
 very lavish system of outdoor relief it is perhaps 
 necessary to state that, of course, an institutional 
 system of relief is not absolutely and in itself a 
 cause of dispauperisation. It only becomes so 
 when it is made a substitute for the much more 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 161 
 
 pauperising system of outdoor relief, and when 
 a certain discipline and restraint is enforced. 
 The difficulty of observing these conditions, more 
 especially in the institutional relief of sickness, is 
 very great, but, unless we are prepared to adopt 
 a general policy of gratuitous sick relief, and 
 the ultimate discontinuance of Friendly Society 
 Sick Insurance, a protest against the uni- 
 versal pauperism of the poor in sickness must be 
 maintained. For this reason some boards make 
 a practice of granting the relief of the infirmary 
 as a loan in cases where repayment is possible. 
 The question is considered a few pages further 
 on in connection with the work of Voluntary 
 Hospitals. 
 
 To return to the understanding which has 
 been made in the above-mentioned places 
 between the representatives of legal and volun- 
 tary agencies of relief, it may be worth while 
 to analyse its characteristics more fully. The 
 plan which has recommended itself as most 
 intelligible and most logical is, that the two 
 parties accept the principle of a complete 
 division of labour. That is to say, one form 
 of relief institutional should be given by the 
 rates. Out-door or domiciliary relief should 
 be given by charitable agencies. 
 
 This plan has been adopted in very few 
 
1 62 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 places. Generally there is no plan. Few Boards 
 of Guardians will consent to forego their 
 patronage in respect of outdoor relief. Many 
 of them, by giving inadequate relief on the 
 plausible assumption set out by boards in 
 reply to Mr Goschen's Circular, encourage 
 paupers to beg for the remainder of their 
 maintenance in other quarters, and too often 
 the administrator of public charity yields to 
 this vicious suggestion. 
 
 Even if charitable agencies refuse to yield, 
 the situation is very unsatisfactory. The Poor 
 Law, by public advertisement as it were, under- 
 takes to grant domiciliary relief whenever 
 this is desirable. There is nothing left, there- 
 fore, for the charitable agencies to do. Some- 
 times they say, "We will deal with the more 
 ' deserving ' class of applicants " ; but this is 
 precisely the class which the guardians profess 
 to be anxious to relieve, and there is no in- 
 telligible reason why charitable agencies should 
 wish to compete with them. 
 
 Sometimes it has been gravely stated by 
 guardians that they will take the more deserving 
 cases, and relieve them out of a fund which is a 
 public fund a rate to which the poor have con- 
 tributed, and out of which they are entitled to 
 draw according to their requirement ; while the less 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 163 
 
 deserving should be dealt with by public charity, 
 on the ground that, by misconduct, they have 
 forfeited their right to the more eligible relief 
 given by the rates. 
 
 At another time the administrator of a charit- 
 able fund will say, " Let us relieve the ' deserving,' 
 because the deserving ought to be relieved ade- 
 quately, and we know that the guardians never 
 relieve adequately." This seems a policy of 
 despair, but perhaps it is the best that the chaotic 
 confusion of the situation will allow. The main 
 objection to each and all of these forms of parochial 
 chaos is that such systems have no dispauperising 
 effect. This overlapping of relief jurisdiction 
 probably also gives rise, on the part of guardians, 
 to the grant of much relief that is unnecessary, 
 because of the want of proper test, and to much 
 relief that is inadequate, because guardians always 
 assume, and in most cases rightly, that applicants 
 do not fully disclose their sources of income. In 
 such cases, they are, therefore, obliged to guess, 
 and even guardians cannot always guess correctly. 
 
 Occasionally, as at Paddington, Birmingham, 
 and Manchester, a very careful system of in- 
 quiry is instituted by the guardians. This at 
 once reduces applications. In Birmingham and 
 Manchester official visitors have been appointed to 
 supervise outdoor relief. This also has reduced 
 
164 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND ICUAP. 
 
 the outdoor list. In Paddington the rule is, that 
 when an applicant who is deemed suitable for 
 outdoor relief has been discovered, relief is not 
 granted till endeavour has been made to obtain the 
 needed relief from a voluntary source. 
 
 A great diminution of pauperism has been 
 secured by this method ; and as there is no sugges- 
 tion that it is otherwise than adequate, it is highly 
 to be recommended. At the same time it is beset 
 with many difficulties. Notoriously the onerous 
 calls on the time of a relieving officer make a 
 really efficient system of investigation in populous 
 districts an impossibility. The first step to be 
 taken, then, is to establish a system of efficient 
 investigation. This, in Paddington, has been 
 secured by an elaborate system of record papers ; 
 and elsewhere, by the appointment of special 
 officers for the superintendence of outdoor relief 
 courses of action not always easily obtained in 
 the normal Board of Guardians. The plan appears 
 also to put the voluntary agencies in a subordinate 
 position, with a humiliating necessity laid on them 
 merely to endorse the recommendations of the 
 Board of Guardians. In some districts the ar- 
 rangement would not work well. Moreover, if a 
 large demand was made by the guardians on 
 charitable agencies, the plan would defeat its own 
 object, and re-introduce under a new name the 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 165 
 
 old abuse, which mainly consisted in setting up a 
 publicly-advertised system of outdoor or domi- 
 ciliary relief. That which is most successful in 
 reducing the incitements to pauperism is best ; 
 but I have always thought that the absolute and 
 exclusive division of work adopted in the three 
 East End Unions is the most logical and the most 
 easily intelligible. The two agencies are there 
 quite independent, and do not interfere with each 
 others' decisions, and each have mutually exclusive 
 departments of work. 
 
 Obviously the initiative in every method of 
 reform lies with the guardians. They have 
 power and, unfortunately, they generally use it 
 to make all co-operation impossible. On the 
 other hand, if they take what I have been en- 
 deavouring to show is a right view of their duties, 
 the matter becomes very simple. If guardians 
 confine their action to offering institutional relief, 
 the field of action for voluntary charities is 
 thereby at once defined, and a certain organiza- 
 tion of charity is at once established. Moreover, 
 if guardians take this view of their duty, it means 
 that some of them and some of their supporters 
 are appreciative of the possibilities of dispauper- 
 isation, and aware of the great assistance which 
 may be rendered by an organisation of voluntary 
 agencies. I am inclined to think that the advan- 
 
1 66 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 tage of a highly centralised organisation may be 
 exaggerated. A wise management of local 
 charities by administrators responsible to a sound 
 public opinion probably would be a better arrange- 
 ment than a centralised local authority. This last 
 tends to officialise what ought to be unofficial and 
 spontaneous, and also to make the voluntary relief 
 agencies assume exaggerated dimensions in the 
 calculations of the poor. Unfortunately there is 
 comparatively little sound public opinion on the 
 subject, and, in default of this controlling influence, 
 a central organising body for each locality has in 
 London been thought desirable ; but elsewhere, as 
 we have noted, no such institution has been 
 thought necessary. 
 
 One noticeable point deserves to be recorded 
 with regard to some of these districts where im- 
 proved methods have been introduced. The 
 division of labour has greatly simplified adminis- 
 tration, not only for guardians, but for persons 
 who are connected with voluntary agencies for 
 relief. A new departure has therefore been found 
 possible by some of those persons whose occupa- 
 tion, with regard to relief, has happily been 
 diminished, if it is not entirely gone. They have 
 begun to interest themselves in the provident 
 associations of the poor, to canvass their districts 
 for Friendly Society recruits, to organise Collect- 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 167 
 
 ing Banks, and generally to constitute themselves 
 ministers of that better and concurrent mechanism, 
 the expansion of which alone offers a permanent 
 and satisfactory solution for the economic dis- 
 abilities of society. 
 
 It is no necessary part of our argument 
 to insist on the details ; we are concerned only 
 with principles. If we can win acceptance for 
 these, detailed methods of reform offer little 
 difficulty. There is no need of an absolute 
 uniformity of procedure. Our crusade is still 
 in its propagandist stage. We have to con- 
 vince people that pauperism is, to a large extent, 
 an unnecessary and artificial evil. If we can 
 make them converts, we must leave it to them 
 to carry on the war against pauperism in the 
 manner which they consider is most likely to 
 be crowned with success. 
 
 Something, perhaps, should now be said 
 on the policy of the Charity Commissioners 
 with regard to Endowed Charities. 
 
 It is worth while to advert again to the 
 curious coincidence already noticed. The same 
 year, 1601, which saw the establishment of 
 our Poor Law, saw also the passing of the 
 important statute of Charitable Uses. The one 
 provided a legal common fund for the use 
 
1 68 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP 
 
 of the poor, the other took steps to preserve 
 to the use of the poor the benefactions of pious 
 founders. In the first half of the nineteenth 
 century both of these laws had given rise to 
 widespread abuse, and it fell to the lot of the 
 same generation to agitate for their reform. 
 We have described the reform of the Poor 
 Law which took place in 1834. Though the 
 agitation for it began at least as early as 
 1818, the reform of charitable endowments did 
 not take place till 1853, when the Charity 
 Commission was appointed. The duty prescribed 
 for it was to control and reform the administra- 
 tion of Endowed Charities, just as the Poor 
 Law Commissioners had to reform the adminis- 
 tration of the endowments derived from the 
 poor-rate. 
 
 The subject-matter was of course different ; 
 but, in principle, the needed reforms were not 
 dissimilar. Mistakes of legislation had created 
 a " community of property," or communism in 
 \ I . the poor rate, and had given rise to a mass 
 of artificial and unnecessary pauperism. So, 
 too, the benevolent intentions of pious founders 
 had set apart property, sometimes of great 
 value, for purposes which a later age often 
 found obsolete, useless, and even mischievous. 
 
 The powers possessed by the Charity Com- 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 169 
 
 missioners are, unfortunately, very limited, and 
 also very intricate. They have power to inquire 
 into the administration of charitable trusts, to 
 compel the production of accounts, to supplement 
 the powers of trustees, to secure safe custody 
 of property, to extend the doctrine of cy pres 
 that is, of diverting funds devoted to obsolete 
 or mischievous purposes to useful objects akin 
 to the intention of the founder and to control 
 legal expenses. 
 
 Their powers are considerable over trusts 
 of which the income does not exceed ^50. 
 When the income exceeds this sum, the consent 
 of trustees is required. Subject to these con- 
 ditions, they are empowered to promulgate 
 schemes for the administration of endowed 
 funds. 
 
 The Commissioners, as official controllers of 
 national charitable funds, have in recent years 
 pursued a policy of diverting, as far as they 
 can, dole charities to the provision of open 
 spaces and institutions more or less devoted to 
 technical education. 
 
 At the present time, however, this last object 
 has seemed sufficiently provided for under the 
 Technical Instruction Act, and, to quote the 
 words of the Commissioners' own Report : 
 
 "In the case of doles, other applications are now more 
 
iyo PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 favoured, as for instance, to old age pensions, which have the 
 recommendation of being nearer in object to the present ap- 
 plication, and do not tend, if rightly safeguarded, to pauperise 
 the recipient." Report of 1894, p. 42. 
 
 The schemes for old age pensions sanctioned 
 by the Commissioners, as a rule, contain a 
 clause prohibitive of giving pensions to persons 
 in receipt of Poor Law relief. As far as I am 
 aware, no attempt has yet been made to ap- 
 portion additional funds to localities where 
 guardians are restricting their outdoor relief. 
 In unions where outdoor relief is freely given 
 to the aged, it is a mere accident whether the 
 applicant is relieved by the Poor Law or by 
 an endowed charity, if such be available. The 
 rule of the Commissioners may prevent the 
 same person being relieved by both authorities, 
 but it does not prevent the two authorities from 
 dealing with the same class and in the same 
 way. The rules also usually insist that the 
 pensions shall be adequate, and, as a matter 
 of fact, the scale adopted by the Commissioners 
 is considerably higher than that observed either 
 by guardians or by unendowed charitable 
 agencies. Public advertisement for candidates 
 is also enjoined. Such notice does not neces- 
 sarily come before the poorest class who might 
 become applicants, but it attracts attention among 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 171 
 
 the more respectable poor and their friends. 
 The claimants, therefore, are generally of a 
 superior class, many of them persons who would 
 not apply unless their friends brought pressure 
 to bear on them. The pensions accordingly go, 
 in a good many cases, to persons who, though 
 poor, are not in any actual distress, and who, 
 failing to get a pension, would still be under 
 no necessity to apply to the Poor Law. It 
 may be a good thing that these pensions should 
 be given, not to persons who are in danger of 
 being destitute, but to worthy poor people of 
 small income, who have the backing which is 
 required to bring their claims to the favourable 
 notice of the trustees. It has, however, this 
 result : that the schemes now being promoted 
 by the Charity Commission will not, in all 
 probability, have much effect on the adminis- 
 tration of the Poor Law and public relief 
 generally. 
 
 One other question of great importance re- 
 quires to be briefly noticed that of Medical 
 Relief. 
 
 The subject is now approaching a critical stage. 
 There is a strong momentum, bearing down all 
 opposition, and leading to an almost universal 
 gratuitous treatment of sickness. It is said that 
 no one will become sick for the sake of gratuitous 
 
172 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 treatment. The point rather is, whether persons 
 are not encouraged to think of sickness as a time 
 in which they are justified in being destitute. The 
 gratuitous system does not encourage sickness ; 
 but it may, and in some cases it certainly does, 
 encourage destitution in sickness. 
 
 There are various interests concerned in the 
 matter that of the poor, that of the hospitals as 
 the seats of medical training, and, lastly, that of 
 the local medical practitioner. The interest of 
 the poor is not only their need of adequate 
 medical treatment, but also their strong desire 
 to be independent both of the Poor Law and 
 charity at all periods and crises of life. Their 
 Friendly Societies are a standing monument of 
 the sacrifices and efforts which they are prepared 
 to make for this purpose. What the poor man 
 really wants is not gratuitous treatment, but a 
 better development of medical insurance, so that 
 he may obtain, as a matter of honourable con- 
 tract, suitable treatment of his maladies. Let 
 us consider how far our present system conduces 
 to this legitimate demand. It is obvious, in the 
 first place, that a universal system of gratuitous 
 relief, whether in Poor Law infirmaries or volun- 
 '. tary hospitals, must operate unfavourably to the ex- 
 tension of Friendly Society insurance. Inasmuch 
 as the adequate and gratuitous treatment of sick- 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 173 
 
 ness in Poor Law establishments puts the pauper"- 
 in a better position than the man who pays, either 
 directly or through subscription to a provident 
 medical association, for his own medical treatment, 
 the plan of granting medical relief as a loan has 
 been adopted with much success. In one union 
 it is stated that the result of this policy has been 
 that well-nigh every man, woman, and child is 
 medically insured. If this plan were generally 
 followed, provident medical associations would 
 enable poor people to receive adequate medical 
 treatment, and yet remain independent. The 
 same considerations supply valid objections to 
 a universally gratuitous hospital system. Except 
 in so far as the requirements of the medical 
 school demands it, there is no occasion for a 
 hospital treatment of trifling maladies. In nine 
 cases of sickness out of ten, what is needed is 
 care as to diet, rest, and a proper regimen of 
 health. Advice on such points can best be given 
 by the local practitioner who knows his patients, 
 and can be secured by an extension of the 
 medical insurance which is already so popular 
 with the wording class. The free doctoring 
 which goes on in the out-patient department of 
 our great London hospitals does not admit of 
 the individual attention which the sick require. 
 It is hurried, and attended by great hardship on 
 
174 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the part of those who have to wait many weary 
 hours before their cases can be considered. 
 Hospital treatment, says a high authority (Mr 
 Timothy Holmes), ought to be, in the main, 
 consultative ; and as hospitals are also schools of 
 medicine, it is possible to secure gratuitous advice 
 from the leading men in the profession for poor 
 persons who are not able to pay the high fees 
 which are legitimately demanded for the valuable 
 time and services of the specialist. This is a 
 privilege of the greatest value, and it ought not 
 to be abused or frittered away by imposing on 
 the hospitals the duty of treating gratuitously the 
 minor illnesses of vast populations. 
 
 It ought not to be beyond the ingenuity of 
 reasonable men to arrange that (i) Poor Law 
 infirmaries should, when necessary, be able to 
 refer some of their difficult cases to the hospitals ; 
 (2) the local practitioner in the poorer parts 
 should be allowed to obtain hospital treatment 
 and advice in cases where a second opinion 
 or special surgical treatment is required ; (3) 
 "privileges of a similar nature should, on honour- 
 able terms, be put at the disposal of the members 
 of Friendly Societies and other medical provident 
 associations. We are very far, unfortunately, 
 from any such system. The hospitals are now 
 treating exactly the same class of persons and 
 
v.] LEGAL AND VOLUNTARY RELIEF 175 
 
 for the same maladies as are treated in our 
 Poor Law infirmaries and dispensaries. The 
 action of both is detrimental to the just claims 
 of the local medical practitioner, who loudly 
 complains of the unfair competition, more 
 especially of that of the large hospitals. The 
 present system is also a standing discouragement 
 to the spread of sound medical insurance, and 
 of the Friendly Society movement generally, 
 and it is to the development of such institu- 
 tions that we have principally to look for a 
 solution of the difficulty. 
 
 Throughout this and every other branch of 
 the subject, the same principles ought to guide 
 us. What the poorer classes want is not only 
 adequate medical treatment, but also inde- 
 pendence ; and we ought so to regulate our 
 administration of medical relief as to secure 
 both objects a consummation which, though 
 difficult, is by no means impracticable. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 
 
 IN speaking of the future, it is proverbially un- 
 wise to prophesy. There are, however, some 
 developments for which we may hope, others 
 which we fear. Change of one kind or another 
 there is certain to be. 
 
 First, as to administration. A very important 
 change was recently made by the Local Govern- 
 ment Act of 1894. Rural Boards of Guardians 
 have been amalgamated with the Rural District 
 Councils. In urban districts and in boroughs 
 there is still a distinct body of guardians ; but it 
 was, I believe, generally understood that this 
 amalgamation of authorities was likely to be 
 carried further. Lately we have had a re- 
 arrangement of Metropolitan Local Government, 
 and it is generally felt that the multiplicity of 
 public bodies is an evil that ought to be remedied. 
 Will it be found possible to amalgamate Boards 
 of Guardians with the general administrative local 
 
 176 
 
CHAP, vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 177 
 
 authority in town, as has already been done in 
 country? and, if so, what will be the result? It 
 is impossible to speak positively, but there un- 
 doubtedly are causes making for a further unifica- 
 tion of local authority. 
 
 To begin with, this has been done in the 
 rural districts already. In matters other than the 
 Poor Law, the recent creation of Borough Councils 
 in the metropolis is a step in the same direction. 
 Another reason is to be found in the way in 
 which the financial liability has been gradually 
 rearranged during the last forty or fifty years. 
 It is an old and time-honoured maxim that 
 representation and taxation should go together. 
 In other words, the spending body should be 
 responsible to the persons who contribute the 
 rates. This, with regard to the Poor Law, has 
 to a considerable extent ceased to be the case. 
 For, roughly speaking, one-quarter of the sum 
 expended in the maintenance of the poor comes 
 from national, as opposed to local sources of 
 taxation, and the amount seems likely to in- 
 crease. 
 
 A word may here be said on the history of 
 this drift from local chargeability to national 
 chargeability. When Sir Robert Peel was 
 abolishing the Corn Laws, he let fall the opinion 
 that, as a tax supposed to be in the interest of 
 
 M 
 
178 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 the land was being repealed, it was only fair 
 that the burden of local rates, which then, as 
 now, fell exclusively on land and houses, should 
 be reconsidered. 
 
 The difficulty of giving relief to local taxa- 
 tion by allocating fresh sources of income to local 
 rate-raising authorities, is apparently insuperable. 
 We have noted how the clear intention of 
 the Act of Elizabeth to rate personalty was 
 frustrated by the sheer impracticability of the 
 proposal. Land and houses are stationary, they 
 are susceptible of geographical definition, and, 
 when such and such a field or house has been 
 decided to lie in such and such a parish or 
 union, the raising of the necessary supplies is 
 a mere question of valuation and assessment. 
 Stock-in-trade is a thing here to-day and 
 gone to-morrow. Much of it never comes into 
 the parish of the various owners in whose 
 possession it temporarily vests. It passes from 
 owner to owner by notes of delivery. Hitherto 
 the collection of such a rate has been generally 
 found impossible. 
 
 A rate levied on income has been suggested ; 
 but the same objections seem to apply. How, 
 for instance, could we make a local distribution, 
 say, of Lord Rothschild's income-tax ? Is he 
 to pay at all the places where he sometimes 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 179 
 
 resides in the city, in his London house, in 
 his various country seats ? As yet the owner- 
 ship of wealth is not a criminal offence, and it 
 would be inequitable to call on him to pay an 
 income-tax in all the rateable areas where he 
 happened to hold property. If he was allowed 
 to choose, he might elect to pay where there 
 is a low rate ; but it would clearly be unjust 
 to assess some farmer for a local income-tax, in 
 addition to, or instead of, his present rate, and 
 excuse Lord Rothschild at his country seats, 
 because he had elected to pay in the city. Nor 
 could it be left to the different localities to 
 wrangle as to which of them was entitled to 
 the spending of Lord Rothschild's local income- 
 tax. The thing, indeed, is impossible ; at least 
 hitherto it has always seemed so, though every 
 one has been anxious to discover new sources 
 of local taxation. 
 
 The reconsideration which Sir Robert Peel 
 promised was given to the subject, and the con- 
 clusion (if we may judge from the measures 
 placed on the statute-book) has been that the 
 subjects on which local taxation falls are en- 
 titled to some relief. This has been effected 
 in what was probably the only practicable 
 manner, short of a rearrangement of authority 
 between local and centralised authority viz., 
 
i8o PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 by grants in aid of local taxation from the 
 national exchequer. 
 
 This policy began, in accordance with Sir 
 Robert Peel's pledge, immediately after the 
 repeal of the Corn Laws. Grants in aid of 
 teachers' salaries and for improvements in 
 medical relief were made in the same year, 
 1846. The amount at first was small, but the 
 policy has been continuously extended. By the 
 Local Government Act, 1888, the plan of dis- 
 tribution has been slightly altered, and, instead 
 of specific grants in aid, the proceeds of certain 
 taxes (certain licences and a share of the death- 
 duties) are handed over through the County 
 Councils to the local authorities. This Ex- 
 chequer contribution amounts to about seven or 
 eight millions per annum. Of this from two to 
 three millions are devoted to Poor Law purposes, 
 constituting, as I have said, about a quarter 
 of the total expenditure on the poor. 
 
 In addition to this, we had recently an in- 
 dication of policy in the Agricultural Rates 
 Act, which, in view of the alleged depression 
 of agriculture and the heavy burdens which 
 it bore, ordered that agricultural land should 
 be excused one-half of the rate paid by other 
 land, and that the deficiency should be made 
 up from national sources. 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 181 
 
 In London, it is also to be observed, the 
 direct financial responsibility of the electors of 
 each administrative district is still further con- 
 fused, if not removed, by the operation of the 
 Metropolitan Common Poor Fund. That, as 
 we know, throws a large proportion of the 
 establishment charges on a fund raised from 
 all London, and not exclusively from the electors 
 who elect each particular Board of Guardians. 
 
 Again, a further irresponsible element is 
 introduced by the institution of the compound 
 householder. A very large, probably a pre- 
 ponderating number, of the electors, both in 
 town and country, do not directly pay any rates 
 at all. Their landlord compounds with the 
 rating authority, and pays the rates of his 
 cottages and houses, receiving a liberal com- 
 mission on the transaction. The tenants, how- 
 ever, are constructively considered as paying 
 these rates, and entitled to exercise any fran- 
 chise which may be connected with them. 
 
 Again, there is a further divorce of local 
 representation and taxation arising from the 
 disfranchisement of corporations, such as dock 
 companies, railways, and limited liability com- 
 panies generally. The local franchise is the 
 personal privilege of an inhabitant or occupier, 
 and cannot be exercised by a corporation or a 
 
1 82 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 company as such. About one-thirteenth of the 
 local taxation of the kingdom is paid by the 
 railway companies alone, but they have no local 
 representation whatsoever. Yet, with all this 
 relief, the local rate-payer is not satisfied. 
 Political busy bodies are casting about for fresh 
 sources of local taxation, in order to relieve 
 their clients from present and impending burdens. 
 Much of this is merely the predatory instinct of 
 politicians seeking to mulct those who are not 
 of their party a line of action which leads, of 
 course, to retaliation. The desire to relieve one 
 set of rate-payers is blended with the wish to 
 launch out into new expenditure at the cost of 
 a larger circle of contributories, as in the pro- 
 posal to put outdoor relief in London on the 
 Common Poor Fund. 
 
 We have moved some way, and, as I do 
 not think there is much chance of discovering 
 new local rateable sources of income, it is 
 probable that we may move a good deal further 
 in the direction of a national poor rate. 
 
 The general argument, such as it is, in 
 favour of a national rate is obvious enough. 
 Just as the old parish chargeability was unjust 
 and inconvenient, because it threw a heavy 
 burden on poor parishes, so, though of course 
 in a less degree, the burden now falls heavily 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 183 
 
 on unions inhabited by poor people, and com- 
 paratively lightly on unions in more fashionable 
 quarters. This inequality is not entirely re- 
 dressed by the subventions in aid paid through 
 the County Councils and through the Metro- 
 politan Common Poor Fund. On the other 
 hand, the objections to a national rate with 
 the present local administration are equally 
 obvious. It would be impossible to allow local 
 bodies to administer national funds. Even as 
 things at present are, the Common Poor Fund 
 in London and the subventions from national 
 sources act as a stimulus to extravagance, and 
 are not wholly satisfactory. If the whole charge- 
 ability was placed on the national exchequer, 
 it would be impossible to continue our system 
 of local administration. If we are well advised, 
 we shall resist any further nationalisation of the 
 poor rate, unless it is accompanied by national- 
 isation of administration. This, practically, was 
 the plan recommended by Sir E. Chadwick, 
 and may or may not be a possible solution. 
 
 There seem, therefore, to be several ten- 
 dencies making for a national rather than a 
 sectional administration of public relief. 
 
 (i) There is a disposition to unify in one 
 reputable and responsible public body all local 
 jurisdiction. 
 
1 84 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 (2) On grounds of equity there has been a 
 disposition to enlarge the area of chargeability 
 from the parish to the union, then from the 
 union to a larger body of contributories e.g., 
 the metropolitan area and to the national area 
 by these subventions in aid. 
 
 (3) As a result of this, it is evident that the 
 electing body pays a fractional, and probably 
 diminishing, amount of the monies raised and 
 expended a condition of things reversing the 
 salutary rule that taxation and representation 
 should go together. 
 
 When we have unified our local administra- 
 tion in towns, as has already been done in the 
 rural districts, it will probably be found that 
 the duties of these bodies are very extensive, 
 very multifarious, and very difficult to over- 
 take. Moreover, their expenditure is sure to 
 grow, and they will be called on to undertake 
 more and more duties. It will then be said 
 that they have too much to do, and that some 
 rearrangement of responsibility is desirable. 
 
 It is to be hoped that, when this arises, we 
 shall not go back and create a number of 
 smaller authorities to vex the land, but that 
 we shall consider whether a more intelligent 
 division of labour cannot be made between the 
 Central and the Local Authority. We should 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 185 
 
 then ask ourselves which, if any, of these duties 
 now overburdening the strength of the local 
 authority would be as well or better discharged 
 by the central authority. If the subject is so 
 considered, it seems not improbable that Poor 
 Law administration may be selected as one of 
 those public services which might with advan- 
 tage be carried on by a more centralised 
 body 
 
 (1) Because the charge is more fairly a 
 national than a sectional responsibility. 
 
 (2) Because already great lengths have been 
 gone to divorce representation and taxation, 
 and the present system of a local body spend- 
 ing funds to a large extent derived from national 
 taxes does not tend to economy and careful 
 administration. 
 
 (3) Because the office of guardian is really 
 a judicial office, requiring for its proper discharge 
 a considerable amount of technical training and 
 knowledge. 
 
 Whether these considerations will lead the 
 country to relegate Poor Law administration, 
 as Sir E. Chadwick wished it relegated, to a 
 staff of salaried experts, it is impossible to say. 
 
 In suggesting that this might be a solution 
 of many difficulties, one must not be held to 
 make any attack on democratic institutions, for 
 
186 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 it is very fully recognised that there are many 
 public services which democracy, if well-advised, 
 will specially exempt from popular and elective 
 management. For instance, the appointment of 
 a judicature, the management of the army, the 
 navy, and the police, currency, and many similar 
 questions, the democracy has very wisely ad- 
 judged to be unsuitable for the arbitrament of 
 popular canvassing ; and it may appear to some 
 that this is a category in which Poor Law 
 administration might very well be included. 
 As a further indication of the way things are 
 drifting, it may be pointed out that the manage- 
 ment of prisons has recently been taken away 
 from the county authorities, and, with a view 
 of lightening local financial burdens, the cost, 
 as well as the administration, has been placed 
 on the Central Authority. It seems also probable 
 that one of the changes recommended by the 
 Local Taxation Commission now sitting will 
 be the transfer of lunatic asylums from the 
 county to the imperial jurisdiction. 
 
 It is, therefore, not improbable that at some 
 time proposals may be made to treat Poor 
 Law administration in the same way. Such a 
 change may be a good one or may be a very 
 bad one, according to the way in which it is 
 managed. That which is best administered is 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 187 
 
 best. We can only hope that, if the change 
 is made, the interests of dispauperisation will 
 not be neglected. 
 
 Change, in this as in other branches of public 
 business, is inevitable, but it is not possible to 
 look forward with any confidence to the treatment 
 which this difficult and important subject will re- 
 ceive if dragged into the political arena. We 
 may have no doubt as to the overpowering weight 
 of argument on the side of a wisely restrictive 
 policy ; but those who understand political 
 manoeuvres are apparently unanimous in thinking 
 that this is a policy which they dare not put before 
 the constituencies. On the contrary, many per- 
 sons who take a leading part in political business, 
 either because they have never considered the 
 subject, or because, having considered it, they are 
 indifferent and reckless, have made liberal offers 
 of Public Relief an item in their electioneering 
 programme. Take this recent agitation on Old 
 Age Pensions. An influential politician, without 
 thinking out the practical difficulties of the 
 question, makes a proposal, and thus sets the ball 
 rolling. The proposal creates great enthusiasm 
 among the groundlings. Other politicians follow 
 suit. The party managers think that there are 
 votes in it. Electioneering cards are printed 
 wholesale, which even get distributed in support 
 
1 88 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 of candidates who afterwards find it necessary to 
 disavow the policy attributed to them. The 
 Opposition dare not oppose. They either ignore, 
 or offer to go further than the original proposal. 
 Even those on both sides who know that the pro- 
 posal is mischievous and impracticable dare not 
 denounce the whole transaction. They confine 
 themselves to saying that they are in favour of 
 the principle of increased public relief to the aged, 
 but that they have not seen any practical scheme. 
 Several commissions and committees of enquiry 
 have been appointed. The first, a royal commis- 
 sion, presided over by the late Lord Aberdare, in 
 its majority report declared in effect that the 
 proposal was mischievous and impracticable. A 
 minority, composed principally of promoters of 
 old age pension schemes, insisted that this verdict 
 had not given sufficient consideration to popular 
 aspiration a strange criticism to come from a 
 body specially selected to consider and advise in 
 a judicial spirit as to a certain novel economic 
 proposal. 
 
 When the party, to which the most active 
 section of the old age pension promoters belongs, 
 came into office, they were asked to redeem their 
 too rash pledges. Another committee (Lord 
 Rothschild's committee) of experts was appointed 
 to examine proposals, and, if necessary, suggest 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 189 
 
 a plan. This committee reported that no work- 
 able proposal had been put before them, and 
 that they were unable to suggest a plan. Then 
 Mr Chaplin stepped into the breach, and became 
 chairman of a select committee of the House of 
 Commons, which, after rejecting the sensible 
 advice of Mr Chaplin to consider the question as 
 a matter of Poor Law administration, drew up what 
 they called heads of a scheme. Mr Chaplin, with 
 the zeal of a new convert, publicly committed him- 
 self to a statement that some two millions, or 
 a is. duty on corn, would meet the expense. 
 The committee which drew up the heads, for 
 some strange reason, declared it was not their 
 business to calculate the cost of their proposals ; 
 so a second committee of experts was appointed. 
 The wearied expert, who, like Balaam, had 
 so often been dragged forward to bless this 
 proposal, was, on this occasion, by the terms 
 of reference, debarred from cursing it again. 
 He was enjoined to confine himself to calcu- 
 lating the cost. The committee found that the 
 cost of giving 55. or 75. a-week pension, accord- 
 ing to the scale of living in each locality, to 
 the aged poor whose incomes were under ics. 
 a week, deducting persons very vaguely defined 
 as unthrifty, aliens, paupers, etc., would be ten 
 millions at once, rising in twenty years' time 
 to fifteen millions. The prospect of such an 
 
i 9 o PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 expenditure at the present time seemed to 
 render the whole proposal impracticable. Mr 
 Chaplin, presumably recognising this, went back 
 to Whitehall, and reverted to his original idea. 
 The pension question was clearly a branch of 
 Poor Law administration, and, by way of re- 
 deeming the pledges of his colleagues, he issued 
 a circular, recommending guardians ^ to return 
 to the old panacea of outdoor relief, and plenty 
 of it a practice against which his predecessors 
 at the board had been protesting for the last 
 sixty years. 
 
 This result of the agitation is perfectly 
 logical and inevitable. If a political party 
 promises to provide at the public expense for 
 the aged poor, it is clearly proposing an addi- 
 tion to, or alteration of, the Poor Law. Mr 
 Chaplin's circular is frankly a Poor Law 
 circular, and the policy no longer disguises 
 itself under the alias of a pension scheme. 
 
 The agitation was begun lightly at a critical 
 election, but its subsequent development has 
 taken place without any pressure. The pro- 
 gressive contagion of reactionary views as to 
 Poor Law relief is certainly very remarkable. 
 Mr Chaplin's circular was to most people as 
 unexpected as a bolt from the blue. The 
 approaching general election of 1900 was 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 191 
 
 obviously to be decided on quite other issues. 
 The circular was not needed for electioneering 
 purposes, and must be referred, presumably, to 
 Mr Chaplin's ardent desire to redeem Mr 
 Chamberlain's pledges. 
 
 If these things are done in the dry leaf, 
 one is prompted to ask what will be done 
 in the green leaf of a popular agitation on 
 the subject. If people can be found ready to 
 support the policy of old age pensions at the 
 public charge, there is absolutely nothing to 
 prevent them becoming equally enthusiastic 
 over proposals to put the other risks of life 
 on the same basis. 
 
 It is a curious fact, and an evidence of the 
 unprincipled nature of the proposal (the term 
 is used in a colourless sense namely, that it 
 is based on no intelligible principle), that, as 
 far as I know, no single promoter of an old 
 age pension scheme has shown us why we 
 should select old age as a disability specially 
 entitled to this treatment. 
 
 If, without injury to that economic inde- 
 pendence of the individual on which the public 
 welfare rests, we can make old age a public, 
 and not a private and personal responsibility, 
 why should we confine this comforting policy 
 to old age ? Why not extend it to widowhood, 
 
192 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 sickness, orphanage,- and want of work ? A far 
 more pathetic interest can be roused in favour 
 of a widow left without provision for a young 
 family, for a man struck down prematurely by 
 sickness in early life, or the labourer who is left 
 without employment, owing to trade fluctuations 
 over which he has no control. The case of an 
 old man, who presumably has had forty or fifty 
 years of able-bodied manhood during which he 
 has had his opportunity of making provision, is 
 by no means the most pathetic figure that our 
 imagination can conjure up. Of course, if we 
 thought that, without detriment to public policy, 
 every one should be given gratuitous public 
 support on honourable terms, the aged and every 
 one else would be welcome to share in this 
 general system of largesse. Such an opinion 
 seems to us mistaken, but it is logical and 
 consistent What we cannot understand is 
 the frame of mind of those promoters of old 
 age pensions who prescribe this public gratuity 
 for one form of distress and not for all. If 
 distress can be relieved in this way, without 
 detriment to public policy, surely we ought to 
 apply the cure all round. 
 
 This, we may be very sure, will be pointed 
 out, if the whole question of Poor Law 
 Relief is once brought into political controversy. 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 193 
 
 Politicians generally have committed themselves, 
 without visible reluctance, to this plan of 
 exceptional treatment for the aged. It has 
 resulted, of course, in nothing, beyond Mr 
 Chaplin's authoritative recommendation that the 
 aged are to be given greater facilities for 
 pauperism, and the most favoured terms. 
 
 It is difficult, therefore, to gather any 
 reason why this same reactionary policy should 
 not be urged as applicable throughout the 
 whole of our Poor Law administration. The 
 shame-faced statement of those who have op- 
 posed this new departure, that they are in favour, 
 on principle, of making old age a public, and 
 not a private responsibility, but that no work- 
 able plan has as yet come under their notice, 
 is not the robust sort of negative which the 
 situation requires. We cannot, therefore, regard 
 the principles of political parties as a very effec- 
 tive safeguard against reactionary legislation. To 
 avert the calamity which might result from 
 the attitude of politicians to questions of 
 relief, we have to look to an improvement in 
 public opinion. The day when statesmen led 
 public opinion seems to be, for the moment 
 at all events, past. Among the educated classes 
 of the community, the number of those who 
 take an interest in the administration of the Poor 
 
 N 
 
194 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 Law is very small relatively, and their political 
 influence is infinitesimal. Fortunately, or per- 
 haps unfortunately (for undoubtedly it was 
 financial pressure, rather than any conviction 
 of social demoralisation, that has brought about 
 reform in the past), the burden of Poor Law 
 Relief is not heavy, and is not increasing. 
 Relatively to the wealth and population of the 
 country, it is a diminishing burden. The 
 only persons who are really aggrieved are the 
 paupers themselves, but they, of course, make 
 no complaint ; it is part of their ailment that 
 they do not complain of their servitude, but 
 demand its extension. 
 
 It is, therefore, among the higher stratum of 
 the working-class that we have to look for the 
 motive-force which will prevent reaction, even if 
 it does not bring about reform. They approach 
 the subject from a point of view different from 
 that which we have been considering. By those 
 who may be considered representative of the 
 more intelligent working-class, such, for in- 
 stance, as the members of Friendly Societies 
 the Poor Law is regarded with a certain amount 
 of impatience. With a true instinct, they hate 
 and abhor the Poor Law and all its works. 
 They recognise, and at the same time resent, 
 the fact that receipt of relief from the Poor Law 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 195 
 
 does inevitably entail a certain position of 
 inferiority. Many of them join in the outcry 
 against those who, often against their own will, 
 are, by the force of circumstances, obliged to 
 administer the Poor Law, so that the position of 
 the pauper is inferior to that of the independent. 
 The pauper, they observe, is either subjected 
 to the confinement of the workhouse, or he is 
 given outdoor relief, which is generally entirely 
 inadequate. They bitterly complain of this in- 
 evitable position of inferiority, which necessarily 
 is the lot of those who, whether by fault or 
 misfortune, are reduced to live at the public 
 expense. They shrink from the remedy of a 
 strict administration, which, it is pointed out, 
 would force, with a perfectly legitimate pressure, 
 a much larger number of the working population 
 into their provident associations, and they im- 
 patiently turn away, declaring, with considerable 
 justice, that the whole administration of the Poor 
 Law is unsatisfactory. 
 
 Here and there a board is captured by 
 enthusiastic reactionaries. They set to work 
 to make their own experiments. The safeguards 
 and discipline which fence the distribution of 
 relief are relaxed. Pauperism, of course, increases. 
 The weak side of human nature is prominently 
 displayed. Even to the fanatical sentimentalist 
 
196 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 (and there is no class so sentimental as the 
 working-class) it becomes apparent that those who 
 descend most eagerly into the maintenance 
 provided by the Poor Law, are not the most 
 estimable of mankind, and that the policy followed 
 is dragging down those who otherwise might have 
 prospered. This gives rise to reflection. Un- 
 fortunately, the experience so gained does not 
 necessarily inform the electorate, and a due 
 supply of reactionary administrators is always 
 forthcoming. The position is closely suggestive 
 of a body of Christian Scientists set to control 
 the management of an hospital. The delegates 
 of reaction might occasionally be taught by ex- 
 perience, but the mass of prejudice in the back- 
 ground is not to be reached by scientific views of 
 surgery and medicine. 
 
 It is, however, an ill wind that blows no one 
 any good ; and this agitation in favour of old age 
 pensions has done a certain amount of good, 
 by obliging the leaders of Friendly Society 
 insurance to look into the question of the Poor 
 Law. It is notorious that the Old Age Pension 
 movement, or, as Mr Chaplin's circular entitles us 
 to call it, the Old Age Pauperism movement, 
 
 
 
 has hitherto been defeated mainly by the 
 opposition of the Friendly Societies. In their 
 interest it has always been considered a 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 197 
 
 necessary condition of a pension scheme that 
 it shall not interfere or compete unfairly with 
 Friendly Society insurance. This condition has 
 really proved fatal, for it is obvious to the 
 meanest intelligence that, if we are going to 
 give gratuitous allowances to aged persons, it is 
 an unfair competition with organisations whose 
 principle has always been that adequate provident 
 insurance must be paid for by adequate contribu- 
 tions. 
 
 The impossibility of making gratuitous public 
 maintenance, accorded to persons or classes on 
 the plea of poverty, an honourable and highly 
 esteemed estate of life, has been pressed home to 
 the intelligence of working-class leaders, who 
 realise now, perhaps more firmly than before, 
 that every extension of Poor Law maintenance 
 removes their class farther from the attainment 
 of their legitimate aspiration namely, complete 
 independence. 
 
 We are not surprised, therefore, to find Mr 
 John Burns, M.P., addressing to his constituents, 
 in February 1894, the following remarks : 
 
 " Every man who has been out of work cheers the man who 
 is in favour of outdoor relief. I have always been against it, 
 except when administered with the greatest rigidity, and given 
 to the right people. ... It means the complete prostitu- 
 tion and degradation of those whom we ought to raise and 
 educate by better means." 
 
198 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 Mr Burns's methods are rhetorical rather than 
 argumentative, and we are not aware that he has 
 taken any steps to secure the adoption of his 
 views by the local guardians of South London. 
 It is a difficult line for a popular politician to take, 
 unless he is convinced that the question is of more 
 importance than any other. Mr Burns has his 
 hands full ; he has shown no disposition to act the 
 crusader in this matter. 
 
 Signs are not wanting, however, that the subject 
 is attracting attention, and that its importance, 
 from the working-man's point of view, is being 
 more adequately appreciated. In proof of this 
 statement, and as an instance of the very thorough 
 and drastic criticism which can be applied to our 
 present pauper system, we cannot do better than 
 append a few quotations from a carefully-reasoned 
 paper, written by Mr Shelley, a prominent 
 member of the Ancient Order of Foresters. 
 Mr Shelley, unlike the majority, who think they 
 can form an opinion on this subject by the light 
 of nature without reference to history and 
 experience, seems to have studied the subject 
 closely, and he comes to the conclusions which 
 every candid inquirer ultimately reaches viz., 
 that pauperism is to a large extent an artificial 
 and unnecessary evil, and that there are great 
 possibilities of reform within our easy reach. 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 199 
 
 After quoting the dispauperisation of Bradfield 
 Union by the restrictive methods which we have 
 described, he exclaims : 
 
 " What a boon to the workers ! What an immense step 
 toward independence of the true calibre ! . . . I should 
 urge all true friends of Friendly Societies, and as many Friendly 
 Society workers as possible, to obtain seats upon the Board of 
 Guardians, and thus see that the great thrift institutions are not 
 prevented from getting as members those, who in the proper 
 course of events, would belong to them, but, owing to the ease 
 with which relief is obtained, failed to see the necessity 
 of making any personal effort toward thrift. . . . Remem- 
 ber that we are reaping greater benefits than any of our fore- 
 fathers better wages, more healthy conditions of life and 
 labour, together with an absolute freedom never before 
 enjoyed ; and yet we have failed to raise from the mud of Poor 
 Law reliance those who have for decade after decade been 
 bred and will die in an atmosphere of Poor Law relief." 
 
 Mr Shelley's paper contains much more in a 
 similar vein. In fact, he recognises that the Poor 
 Law is a most formidable enemy to the Friendly 
 Societies ; and this, coming from a representative 
 of these associations, is a very important pro- 
 nouncement. Mr Shelley's paper was read to an 
 audience composed partly of Friendly Society men, 
 and partly of persons interested in the adminis- 
 tration of the Poor Law. The discussion which 
 followed was of great interest. The position 
 taken up by Mr Shelley was defended by him and 
 some of his colleagues with considerable vehem- 
 
200 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 ence, and in a much more uncompromising spirit 
 than the Poor Law reformer often ventures to 
 show. It was obvious that, if this opinion ever 
 was adopted by the working-class, very short 
 work would be made of the abuses of outdoor 
 relief and of the baneful competition of the poor 
 rate with provident insurance. It was more 
 difficult to judge how far such views were likely 
 to be adopted and carried into action by working- 
 class electorates. As far as could be gathered 
 from the opinions expressed, Mr Shelley's views 
 were not as yet shared by many of his colleagues ; 
 but it was confidently asserted that such opinions 
 were making progress, and that, as a rule, if any 
 one took the trouble, as Mr Shelley had done, to 
 go into the subject, there was only one conclusion 
 to which he could come. Unfortunately, very few 
 did take the trouble, and the majority was still 
 influenced by prejudice. Mr Shelley's very 
 thorough appreciation of the true grounds of an 
 alliance between a policy of dispauperisation and 
 the progress of provident insurance is very en- 
 couraging. If such voices obtain a hearing, 
 they cannot fail to carry conviction to candid 
 minds. 
 
 The question of Poor Law administration is a 
 very difficult one on which to conduct what our 
 American cousins call a campaign of education. 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 201 
 
 Reverting once more to the analogy already 
 noted between the treatment of bodily and 
 economic infirmity, we may express a doubt 
 whether the most enlightened public opinion 
 would be wise to do more than relegate the 
 management of such matters to properly-qualified 
 practitioners. It is possible, nay, it is essential, 
 to obtain from public opinion a general assent to 
 the principles of surgery, amounting, perhaps, to 
 no more than an admission of the occasional use- 
 fulness of the surgeon's knife ; and in the kindred 
 province of social therapeutics it is equally 
 necessary, and, we hope, possible, to obtain accept- 
 ance for the proposition that pauperism is a 
 disease which can be indefinitely reduced by 
 the proper economic remedies. In neither the 
 one case or the other does it appear to us 
 convenient that the popular voice should go 
 beyond this attitude of general acquiescence, and 
 seek to usurp executive authority by subjecting 
 a deliberately-adopted scientific treatment to 
 the control of a fortuitous local sentiment. 
 
 It is admitted that public opinion has pro- 
 nounced no very definite view on the subject. 
 We have, however, no fear of the verdict if 
 the issues are fairly joined. What we do fear, 
 and, as the experience since 1834 proves, with 
 reason, is the difficulty of getting correct verdicts 
 
202 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 on innumerable individual cases from some 6000 
 fortuitous boards triennially elected to administer 
 a most elastic body of law. 
 
 If public opinion ever does become seriously 
 interested in the treatment of pauperism, it may, 
 as in 1834, come to the deliberate adoption of 
 a scientific policy. If, however, it wishes to 
 have such policy carried into effect, it must 
 avoid the error of 1834, and make sure that 
 the administration of its views is entrusted to 
 properly-qualified and responsible persons, whose 
 training and terms of engagement would prevent 
 them falling back into the plausible but fallacious 
 methods which have wrecked the fair promise of 
 the legislation of 1834. 
 
 We have now discussed two important factors 
 of the situation firstly, the possibility of legisla- 
 tive changes such as may lead to a rearrange- 
 ment of responsibility between local and central 
 authority ; and, secondly, the possibility of the 
 subject attracting a closer attention from the 
 class which is politically most powerful namely, 
 the working-class. 
 
 To these two considerations a third may now 
 be added, based on the evidence, which is readily 
 forthcoming, as to the rapid increase of working- 
 class property, the outward and visible sign of 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 203 
 
 the passage of the poorer population from the 
 status of pauperism to economic independence. 
 
 In calculating the chances that there are for 
 the emancipation of the people from pauperism, 
 we must have regard to two things : (i) The 
 attractive and retentive qualities of the pauper 
 maintenance ; (2) the expansive and absorbent 
 nature of the independent and industrial life. 
 With regard to the first, we have said that, 
 though far larger than it need be, the pauper 
 population does not increase. Relatively to the 
 solvent population, it actually decreases. On 
 the other hand, the natural increment of 
 population (about 1 1 per cent, in the decade 
 of the census) is silently absorbed into the in- 
 dependent economic section of the community. 
 If we ask how that portion of the increase 
 which belongs to the manual labouring class is 
 supported in those inevitable crises of life during 
 which formerly they came upon the poor rate, 
 the answer can best be indicated by pointing to 
 the rapidly-increasing amount of working-class 
 property. 
 
 A computation made with regard to 1877 
 disclosed a sum of a hundred and eleven millions, 
 tabulated in various official documents, as specially 
 working-class investments. In 1891 a similar 
 calculation showed the sum to be two hundred 
 
204 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 and twenty millions. In his excellent little 
 book, Provident Societies and Industrial Wel- 
 fare, 1898, Mr Brabrook, the Chief Registrar 
 of Friendly Societies (exclusive of the important 
 item of insurance companies which are included 
 in the above computations), names three hundred 
 millions as the sum which comes within the 
 cognisance of his office as for the most part the 
 property of the labouring class. 
 
 Few persons have any conception as to the 
 enormous development of insurance and saving 
 among the weekly wage-earning class. The 
 reference submitted to the last departmental 
 Committee on the Aged Poor involved a calcula- 
 tion as to the numbers who should be excluded 
 from the benefit of a pension scheme, on the 
 ground that they could not show "proved exer- 
 cise of reasonable providence by some definite 
 mode of thrift." As a contribution to the solution 
 of this calculation, a memorandum was submitted 
 from the Registry of Friendly Societies, in which 
 the authorities commit themselves to the opinion 
 that, accepting membership in some provident 
 association as a fulfilment of the test, " the 
 general inference to be drawn from this branch 
 of the inquiry is that few of those who are 
 qualified under the previous six heads will be 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 205 
 
 unable to show some ground of qualification 
 under the seventh." Of the six previous heads 
 the only important ones were freedom for last 
 twenty years from crime and from pauperism up 
 to the age of sixty-five. If we add to this 
 general statement that in one Insurance Company 
 alone viz. the Prudential which does business 
 almost exclusively with the wage-earning class, 
 there are fourteen million policies in force, insuring 
 the lives of about a third of the whole population 
 of these islands, we may realise how important 
 an element is insurance in the domestic economy 
 of the working class. The most popular forms 
 of insurance, we are credibly informed, are still 
 the old-fashioned whole-life policy ; though of 
 late the endowment policy (assuring a sum pay- 
 able at death or on reaching a given age), with 
 a guaranteed surrender value, has very much 
 increased. Deferred annuities, the form of in- 
 vestment which pension schemes have sought to 
 popularise, are, on the other hand, entirely 
 neglected. 
 
 Those of us who have leisure to turn over 
 the advertisements which arrive by the daily 
 post must have been struck with the great 
 variety of proposals that are made to us with 
 regard to insurance. Many objects, which 
 formerly people only thought of obtaining by 
 
206 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 saving, pure and simple, can now be secured by 
 insurance. 
 
 This is obviously an enormous convenience 
 to the professional man, (and if these companies 
 think it worth while to advertise, we may safely 
 conclude that business is being done), e.g. in 
 insuring an income at a given age (I am 
 quoting from a prospectus before me) for the 
 family after death, endowment for a child on 
 reaching twenty-one, and indeed for every con- 
 ceivable object. The offices practically offer 
 to do their "capitalisation" for the professional 
 class, and the same is being done for the work- 
 ing class. It is, of course, true that a portion 
 of these insurances is merely for what is called 
 "burial money"; but there is abundant evidence 
 to show that the portion of it devoted to the 
 more serious object of provision for widows and 
 old age is rapidly increasing, and that it is being 
 effected on reasonable terms. The important 
 point is that the idea of insurance is already 
 very familiar, that its methods are improving, 
 and that its convenience, so obvious for those 
 whose incomes are not derived from realised 
 savings, is to a large extent appreciated by the 
 wage-earning class. 
 
 It is frequently said that this is the age of 
 large capitalists, and that small tradesmen are 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 207 
 
 being crushed out. Whether this is true or not 
 seems very questionable ; but, so far as it may 
 be true, it involves the great increase of a 
 salaried and wage-earning class, and for them 
 these offers of insurance are calculated to meet 
 a want. 
 
 It is, however, questionable whether small 
 tradesmen are being crushed out. A very 
 interesting paper by Prince Krapotkine was 
 recently published in The Nineteenth Century 
 Review on the small industries of Great Britain, 
 in which he showed from official statistics that 
 it was very far from being the case that small 
 industries were dying out. On the contrary, 
 the greater part of British industry is still in 
 the hands of small tradesmen. Even in America, 
 the home of the Trust, there are still many 
 trades in which small undertakings more than 
 hold their own against large combinations of 
 capital. The capital values of many indus- 
 tries have been unduly inflated, and the 
 conditions of success are, by a sort of re- 
 action, coming within the reach of the practical 
 tradesman with a small capital, derived partly 
 from savings but more largely from credit. The 
 cycle trade, it is said, is an instance in point. 
 The big companies, with an inflated share 
 capital, cannot compete with the industrious 
 
2o8 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP. 
 
 skilful mechanic. He purchases some of the 
 component parts and manufactures others, and 
 fits his machines together skilfully and cheaply. 
 The banks find it to their interest to lend money 
 to such persons on mutually advantageous terms. 
 This accords with the experience of our Scottish 
 Banking system, which did so much at the 
 beginning of last century in developing the 
 industry of Scotland. It also explains the 
 principle on which rests the great success of 
 the Popular Banking inaugurated in Germany 
 by Raiffeisen, and introduced by Signer Luzzatti 
 and others into Italy. A small but encouraging 
 beginning has been made in Ireland by Mr 
 Horace Plunkett's Agricultural Association, and 
 the principle is certainly suitable for adoption 
 in the many quarters where small industries still 
 exist. The story of this popular and economic 
 success is admirably told in Mr Wolffs book 
 on Peoples Banks. 
 
 A successful organisation of popular credit 
 would do much to open a career to talent of all 
 kind, and would give an immense encourage- 
 ment to endeavours to rise out of that purely 
 proletariate life which is so readily converted 
 into pauperism. In other words, it would add 
 greatly to the absorbent power of the con- 
 current and better mechanism of society, to 
 
vi.] THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC RELIEF 209 
 
 which we have already so frequently made 
 reference. 
 
 The evidence as to what the poor are doing 
 for themselves is a profitable field of study for 
 those who are interested in the administration 
 of public relief. It is an encouragement to them 
 to persevere in the unpopular task of opposing 
 too facile systems of relief. It affords good 
 ground for hoping that, though the pressure 
 against them is still considerable, it will probably 
 diminish as time goes on. 
 
 It serves also to remind the charitable that 
 too exclusive thought should not be given to 
 systems of relief. Attention must also be paid 
 to the already imposing developments of work- 
 ing-class thrift. The most useful line of action 
 for the charitable will be to restrict the one, 
 and to increase the popularity and efficiency of 
 the other. 
 
 Well - to - do people take great liberties in 
 offering advice to their poorer neighbours, and 
 in many cases it is accepted gratefully. But are 
 they all qualified to offer advice ? Undoubtedly 
 not, if they insist in ignoring the work done by 
 working-class provident institutions. 
 
 If charitable persons will qualify themselves 
 to offer advice on such subjects, it will be 
 advantageous in two ways. First, they will 
 
 o 
 
2 io PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND [CHAP, vi, 
 
 see clearly the close connection and competition 
 which exists between systems of relief and the 
 progress of provident institutions, and this know- 
 ledge will make them better administrators of 
 public relief. Second, the criticism and greater 
 publicity which would thus be brought to bear 
 on provident associations would be most valuable, 
 for, like all other human institutions, they are 
 capable of improvement. 
 
 From a survey of this aspect of the subject, 
 our conviction will be confirmed that the in- 
 dependent economic life has inexhaustible 
 absorbent powers, and that a policy of emanci- 
 pation in respect of Public Relief is wise, 
 practicable, and humane. 
 
 THE END. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 SELECTED LIST OF AUTHORITIES 
 
 THE FIRST REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS FOR INQUIRING 
 INTO THE ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATION OF THE POOR 
 LAWS IN 1834, oct. 301 pp. [Under this title the Report 
 of the Commissioners of Inquiry, appointed in 1832, has 
 frequently been reprinted. The original Report, with Ap- 
 pendices A-F, contains 8196 folio pages]. 
 
 This is the most important document in connection with 
 the subject. 
 
 A valuable list of authorities, previous to 1834, is con- 
 tained in an Appendix to the REPORT OF GEORGE COODE, ESQ., 
 TO THE POOR LAW BOARD, ON THE LAW OF SETTLEMENT AND 
 REMOVAL OF THE POOR, pp. 193-352. 1851. 
 
 For the period previous to 1834. 
 
 The following may be mentioned. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF THE POOR LAWS, WITH OBSERVATIONS, 
 by RICHARD BURN, LL.D., etc., 1764. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF THE POOR, THEIR RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND 
 
 THE LAWS RESPECTING THEM, by THOMAS RUGGLES, ESQ., etc., 
 
 1793- 
 
 TRACTS ON POOR LAWS AND PAUPER MANAGEMENT, by 
 JEREMY BENTHAM, vol. viii. of his collected works, 1843, 
 originally issued about 1797. [The source from which perhaps 
 
 unconsciously Mr Chadwick derived many of his ideas]. 
 
 211 
 
212 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 THE STATE OF THE POOR, by SIR FREDERIC MORTON EDEN, 
 Bart, in 3 vols, 1797. [A most remarkable storehouse of 
 facts]. 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON THE POOR LAWS, by JOHN DAVIDSON, 
 M.A., etc., 1817. 
 
 A SECOND LETTER TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ROBERT 
 PEEL, ON THE CAUSES OF THE INCREASE OF PAUPERISM, etc., 
 by ONE OF HIS CONSTITUENTS (BISHOP COPLESTONE). 1819. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLE OF THE ENGLISH POOR LAWS, ILLUSTRATED 
 AND DEFENDED, by FREDERICK PAGE, Esq., etc., 1822, 107 pp. 
 [An able philosophical treatise]. 
 
 EIGHT LETTERS ON THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR POOR, ETC., 
 IN THE TWO PARISHES OF SOUTHWELL AND BINGHAM, by AN 
 OVERSEER (Sir GEO. NICHOLLS), 1822. [Reprinted from the 
 Nottingham Journal ; a detailed account of successful manage- 
 ment under the Old Poor Law]. 
 
 A LETTER TO SAMUEL WHITBREAD, M.P., ON HIS PROPOSED 
 BILL FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE POOR LAWS, by the Rev. 
 T. R. MALTHUS. Second edition, 1807. 
 
 THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE PAROCHIAL SYSTEM WITHOUT A 
 POOR RATE, by THOMAS CHALMERS, D.D., n.d. 
 
 CHALMERS ON CHARITY, a selection of passages, etc., edited 
 by N. MASTERMAN, 1900. [This volume has gathered in very 
 convenient form the teaching of Chalmers as expounded by 
 him in a great many publications]. 
 
 For the period after 1834. 
 
 A HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH POOR LAW, etc., by Sir 
 GEORGE NICHOLLS, K.C.B. New edition, edited by H. G. 
 WILLINK. 2 vols. 1898. 
 
 A HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH POOR LAW, etc., vol. iii., 
 from 1834 to the present time. A supplementary volume to the 
 above, by THOMAS MACKAY. 1899. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 213 
 
 PAUPERISM AND POOR LAWS, by ROBERT PASHLEY. 1852. 
 [Mainly a denunciation of the evils of the law of Settlement 
 and Removal]. 
 
 HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAYS, by NASSAU W. 
 SENIOR, Esq., 2 vols. 1865. (Vol. ii., "Essay on English Poor 
 Laws"). 
 
 A DICTIONARY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, by HENRY 
 DUNNING MACLEOD. 1863. (Article :" Edwin Chadwick "). 
 
 THE HEALTH OF NATIONS : A REVIEW OF THE WORKS 
 OF EDWIN CHADWICK, by BENJAMIN WARD RICHARDSON. 
 1887. 
 
 ON THE EVILS OF DISUNITY IN CENTRAL AND LOCAL 
 ADMINISTRATION, by EDWIN CHADWICK, C.B. 1885. 
 
 PAUPERISM : ITS CAUSES AND REMEDIES, by HENRY FAW- 
 CETT, M.A., M.P. 1871. 
 
 LETTERS AND OTHER WRITINGS OF THE LATE EDWARD 
 DENISON, M.P. for Newark, edited by Sir BALDWYN LEIGHTON, 
 Bart. 1872. 
 
 DISPAUPERISATION, by J. R. PRETYMAN. 1876. 
 
 THE POOR LAW, by T. W. FOWLE. 1881. (Macmillan's 
 " Citizen Series " ). 
 
 THE BETTER ADMINISTRATION OF THE POOR LAW, by W. 
 CHANCE. 1895. 
 
 CHILDREN UNDER THE POOR LAW, by the same. 1897. 
 
 OUR TREATMENT OF THE POOR, by the same, n.d. (1899). 
 
 THE ENGLISH POOR LAW SYSTEM, by Dr P. F. ASCHROTT. 
 Translated from the German by Herbert Preston-Thomas, 1888. 
 
 LA Loi DES PAUVRES ET LA SOCIETE ANGLAISE, par EMILE 
 CHEVALLIER. 1895. 
 
 THE EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLISH POOR RELIEF, by E. M. 
 LEONARD. 1900. 
 
 SOME POOR RELIEF QUESTIONS, WITH THE ARGUMENTS 
 ON BOTH SIDES, by Miss GERTRUDE LUBBOCK, 1895. 
 
214 PUBLIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND 
 
 PLAIN WORDS ON OUT RELIEF. ANON. Knight & Co., 
 1894. [An argument in favour of outdoor relief; see also 
 a correspondence in the Charity Organization Review, Feb., 
 April, June and July numbers 1894]. 
 
 THE BOOK OF THE BASTILES ; OR, THE HISTORY OF THE 
 WORKING OF THE NEW POOR LAW, by G. R. WYTHEN BAXTER. 
 1841. [A compilation of the adverse criticisms directed 
 against the New Poor Law]. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLES OF THE ENGLISH POOR LAW : A Paper 
 read by MR G. LANSBURY at the Central Poor Law Con- 
 ference, 1897. Report No. n of Series 1896-97. [An ex- 
 position of the Socialist's attitude towards the Poor Law]. 
 
 On the Special Subject of the Growth of Working 
 Class Savings. 
 
 ENGLISH ASSOCIATIONS OF WORKING MEN, by J. M. 
 BAERNREITHER ; translated from the German. 1889. 
 
 PROVIDENT SOCIETIES AND INDUSTRIAL WELFARE, by E. 
 W. BRABROOK, C.B., Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies. 
 1898. 
 
 PEOPLE'S BANKS, by H. W. WOLFF. Second edition. 
 1896. 
 
 The Reader is also referred to the REPORTS OF THE POOR 
 LAW CONFERENCES, and to the ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE 
 POOR LAW COMMISSIONERS, of the POOR LAW BOARD, 
 and of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD. Special attention is 
 drawn to the "CONTINUANCE" REPORT OF THE POOR LAW 
 COMMISSIONERS, published in 1839. 
 
 The Reports and Evidence published by various Com- 
 missions and Committees of Inquiry should also be consulted. 
 
 PRINTED AT 
 
WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 Methods of Social Reform 
 
 Essays, Critical and Constructive, Price Js. 6d. 
 
 John Murray. 1896 
 
 " A very clear and persuasive exponent of what may be called the 
 orthodox school of Poor Law reformers." Spectator. 
 
 " An excellent chapter on People's Banks will command attention, and 
 Freedom of Exchange v. the Collective Bargain is ably reasoned." St 
 James Gazette. 
 
 " C'est un veritable service qu'il rend en soumettant a une critique tres 
 serree la methode et les resultats de MM. Booth, Hunter, etc." Le Sitcle. 
 
 ' ' In the paper called the ' Abuse of Statistics,' which is reprinted from the 
 Quarterly Review, he makes a rather formidable attack on Mr Charles 
 Booth." The Times. 
 
 "Whether we agree or disagree with Mr Mackay, it will be readily 
 admitted that he writes with a sincerity and a strength of conviction which 
 command respect." Manchester Guardian. 
 
 WORKS EDITED BY THE SAME. 
 
 A Plea For Liberty 
 
 An Argument against Socialism and Socialistic Legisla- 
 tion, consisting of an Introduction by HERBERT 
 SPENCER, and Essays by Various Writers. 
 
 Edited by THOMAS MACKAY. 
 New and Revised Edition, price 2s. John Murray. 1892. 
 
 "This collection of essays . . . prefaced by weighty observations, by 
 Mr Herbert Spencer, and the work of a group of able writers, gives expres- 
 sion, and not too soon, to a deep though rarely articulate feeling." Times. 
 
 A Policy of Free Exchange 
 
 Essays by Various Writers on the Economical 
 
 and Social Aspects of Free Exchange. 
 
 Edited by THOMAS MACKAY. 
 
 Price 12s. John Murray. 1894 
 
 " The present volume is concerned with the discussion of economic and 
 social problems, and is written from the point of view of those who hold 
 that the principle of Free Exchange is capable of inspiring a constructive 
 policy. . . . The book, in its general aspects, may be described as a power- 
 ful exposure of the vapid talk, inconclusive reasoning, and cloudy sentiment 
 which enter so largely into the Socialistic contentions," Standard. 
 
OTHER WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 The State and Chanty 
 
 Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 Macmillan 6 Co. 1898 
 
 " The State and Charity ... is a valuable and instructive contribution 
 to the well-known ' English Citizen ' Series ... is all the more edifying, 
 because while full of suggestive and impartial criticism, it is not in the least 
 dogmatic. " Times. 
 
 A History of the English Poor Law 
 
 From 183410 the Present Time : Being a Supplementary 
 
 Volume to " A History of the English Poor Laws," 
 
 By Sir GEORGE NiCHOLLS, K.C.B. 
 
 Price 2 is. 
 
 P. S. King & Son. 1899 
 
 "Every reader who has tramped with Nicholls along the highways and 
 byways of Poor Law history will be grateful for the easier and more 
 attractive route provided in the philosophic treatise of Mr Mackay. . . . 
 Mr Mackay has been able to make a really valuable contribution to what 
 may be called the history of Poor Law thought. . . . There is a side to this 
 fascinating book which suggests various reflections of a supplementary or 
 critical nature, viz., the many scattered paragraphs upon the structure and 
 working and interworking of the central and local bodies which are or have 
 been employed in carrying out the English Poor Law. . . . Mr Mackay 
 provides an indispensable and valuable framework for the philosophic 
 reformer of the future, and he knows how to combine in an attractive form 
 the work of the lawyer, the pamphleteer, the statesman, the Blue-book 
 maker, and the statistician." Speaker. 
 
 "The work of a man most fully qualified both by grasp of economic 
 principle and by practical experience. Whether he is writing on the theory 
 of the Poor Law, or the effect of Poor Law relief on wages, or whether he 
 is describing the actual position of the problem of dispauperisation, the 
 reader feels that he is in the hands of a clear thinker, open-minded, who is 
 at the same time master of his facts." Spectator, 
 
r>AY USE 
 
 -STANFORD 
 
 07 '94 
 
 . Gen 
 
 LD 21A-407n-ll,'63 
 (El602slO)476B 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
YD n/ / 
 U. C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 /3OO59 
 
 A\25 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY