THE POOR LAW AND THE POOR.*
Ms. THOMAS MacrcaY is a very clear and persuasive ex- ponent of what may be called the orthodox school of Poor- law reformers,—the school which aims, in his words, at "such an alteration in the Poor-law as will secure adequate relief for the destitute and at the same time foster independence and reduce pauperism." His readers, even if slightly repelled at first by some of his hard sayings, will be constrained to recognise that he both makes out a strong case against any further endowment of poverty, either by legislation on the sub- ject of old-age pensions or by later administration of the exist- ing Poor-law, and that he shows that much of the present ad- ministration of outdoor relief is open to very grave question. All through he keeps steadily forward one great point—the duty of placing no needless hindrance in the way of the natural self-prompted improvement of the condition of the poor; and the chief interest of his book lies in his profound belief in that natural capacity for improvement and in the varied and effective methods by which he illustrates it. It is from that point of view that he triumphs in the great re- duction of pauperism in the Metropolitan unions, White. chapel, St. George's-in-the-East, and Stepney ; the great pro. vincial city unions, such as Manchester and Birmingham ; and the rural unions, such as Brixworth and Bradfield, where a strict policy is in operation with regard to outdoor relief. He is comparatively indifferent to the saving in rates effected by the strict policy, large as that saving is. What he cares about, and what he does much to excite his readers' enthusiasm for, is the growth of honest independence on the part of the classes who, under a lax system of administration, would have failed to receive that necessary stimulus to exertion and economy which a steadily practised strictness on the part of the Poor-law guardians has provided. He sets forth compactly and effectively the records of the results achieved in such unions as those just mentioned, so far as they can be expressed in figures, and undoubtedly they are in the highest degree impressive. We cannot quote many figures here, but it may be mentioned that in Whitechapel the num- ber of outdoor paupers relieved in a given week in 1871 was 2,568, and that it fell steadily in the corresponding weeks of succeeding years to 128 in 1880, and to 30 in 1894; and as the small figures relating to the two latter years were largely made up by boarded-out pauper children, it may be said that outdoor pauperism in Whitechapel, in the ordinary sense of the words, has been practically killed. During the same period the number of indoor paupers relieved had only risen from 1,219 to 1,623—an increase, moreover, which was partly due to the counting-in of imbecile paupers among the indoor paupers in later years. In Manchester the average number of persons receiving outdoor relief on one day in 1872.73 was 3,198, in 1892-93 it was 594. During the same period the average daily number of indoor paupers bad risen only from 2,298 to 2,718. In the rural union cf Bradfield, on the borders of Berkshire and Oxfordshire, there were on January lst, 1871, in receipt of poor-relief 999 outdoor and 259 indoor paupers (exclusive of lunatics in asylums and vagrants), a total of 1,258, or one in thirteen of the popula- tion. On January 1st, 1893, the corresponding figures were as follows : outdoor paupers, 22; indoor, 99; total 121, or one in 148 of the population.
• (1.) Methods of Social Reform : Essays Critical and Constructive. By Thomas Mackay. London John blurray.—(2.) Looking Upward : Papers Introductory to the Study of Social Questions from a Religious Point of Vier. By James ildderley. London: Wells Gardner, Dartor, atcl Mr. Mackay believes that these figures, and others like them represent to a very large extent a liberation of the forces of independence among the poor,—in other words, that the great majority of the persons who under the old system would•have leant on the Poor-law for support, have learned, under the strict system, that they could stand alone, and have done so, to their own infinite advantage. There are, we pre- sume, on the other hand, people who would contend that what is represented by such figures as those quoted is, in large measure, the infliction of undeserved suffering which the "Guardians of the Poor" were bound to prevent. Mr. Mackay adduces expert statements and opinions which, in our judgment, afford a very powerful presumptive case in favour of his interpretation of the figures. In the three East London unions in which the strict policy has been enforced —Whitechapel, St. George's-in-the-East, and Stepney—there have been actively at work, through the greater part of the period concerned, committees of the Charity Organisation Society to which applications for aid could be made by persona who were refused outdoor relief by the guardians, and who were not willing to go into the workhouse. " In St. George's-in-the-East the outdoor relief administered by the guardians in 1871 was 28,916; in 1874, £4,391. It is now a merely nominal sum, and the local Charity Organisation Society is giving relief at the rate of about £600 per annum. The clergy of the union are firm supporters of the Society, and the indiscriminate almsgiving is probably less now than in the old out-relief days. As a matter of fact, moreover, the Committee does not refuse many cases," and " has never refused a case for lack of funds." The trade of the union, it is further mentioned, is, on the whole, less prosperous than in old days, owing to the decline of the shipbuilding and sugar industries. From such facts as these it seems to us diffi- cult to draw any other conclusion than that the virtual abolition of outdoor relief in St. George's-in-the-East has been a solid contribution to the independence of the popula- tion, as well as a great economy in rates, and has been effected, thanks to the co-operation of well-directed private charity, without the infliction of hardship on the deserving poor. The experience of Bradfield points strongly to a like conclusion. There the total Poor-law expenditure was reduced from £10,865 in 1871 to £1,995 in 1893. The late Mr- Bland-Garland, chairman of the Bradfield Union, "told a friend of mine, who has repeated it to me," says Mr. Mackay, "that when he became responsible for the administration at Bradfield, he put aside a certain annual sum —2100, I think—which be was prepared to give away in order to make the transition to a stricter system more easy. He added that in the first year the demand on his parse did not reach half that sum, and that in subsequent years it became gradually less." In the case of Manchester, again, as to which some remarkable figures have been given above, Mr. Mackay quotes from Mr. Alexander McDougall, vice-chair- man of the Board of Guardians, the statement that " this large reduction in the number of persons granted out-relief has not been at the cost of hardship and suffering. Careful inquiry has failed to discover any cases of necessity unre- lieved because of strict adherence to the regulations." In Manchester an association, working very much on the lines of the Charity Organisation Society in London, has facilitated the transition to the stricter system of administration, and one of the guardians (in Mr. Mackay's belief Mr. McDougall himself) has raised from voluntary sources a small pension fund for distribution among a number of destitute respectable old people. " The number of such persons," however, he says, " even in a large population is not great, because the majority of aged persons have children able to contribute to their support." So far as we can see, these cases may be regarded as fairly typical of a large proportion of English unions, and it seems to us that Mr. Mackay has done excellent service in bringing them together and emphasising their lessons, which ought to be studied by all interested in the welfare of the poor. Unless the facts and figures which he marshals, and which for the most part have been in some form or other before the public for some time past, can be successfully challenged, it certainly appears that in the numerous unions where outdoor relief is still extensively administered, a heavy and needless check is being imposed, in the name of humanity, upon the natural tendencies to human progress. Not only in this connection, but in regard to the general subject of Poor-law administration, Mr. Mackay argues forcibly in favour of a new and comprehensive inquiry by per- sons of high character and position, not associated with party politics. He makes out a very good case for such an inquiry. with a view to fresh legislation, having regard to such circum- stances as the "unemployed" difficulty, which has assumed large proportions in recent years, and the want of firmness and clear-sightedness on the part of politicians on both aides in connection with the Local Government Act of 1894. We should be glad to believe that the Unionist Government would in this respect follow the precedent of 1834, but in any event it is of the first importance that the subject should be far more widely taken up by enlightened and benevolent persons throughout the country. In greater or less degree their co- operation will be generally, if not always, required to secure that a strict administration of the Poor-law—whether as it stands, or under some new legislation—shall achieve its end, in the depauperisation of large numbers in the humbler grades of the working classes, without the infliction, in how- ever comparatively small a number of cases, of hardships that would justly shock the public conscience.
It is a far cry from Mr. Mackay's Methods of Social Reform to Mr. James Adderley's Looking Upward. The atmosphere of the latter book is one of sympathy with, as that of the former is that of antipathy to, the aspirations and tendencies which are loosely grouped together under the name of Socialism. We are no Socialists, nor do we believe that the cure of the ills of society lies that way. Socialism for the most part means coercion, legislative, fiscal, or industrial, applied to those who have more to induce them to give to those who have less. Bat it is due to Mr. Adderley to say that the Socialism which be practises and preaches is the spontaneous sacrifice of wealth, luxury, and leisure by the well-to-do for the sake of their less fortunate brethren, and that be enforces the duty of such sacrifice in his latest book by a fervent and often impressive endeavour to relate the princi- ples of Christianity to the needs of modern life. We cannot say that he strikes us as having exactly thought out the solution of many of the problems on which he touches ; but we have no doubt that lives of such devotion as his own exemplifies, and as his writings advocate, do contribute very materially towards the diminution of the difficulties and dangers which attend our social condition. Mr. Mackay's "methods" of social reform, negative and positive, have a great deal of soundness in them, and his chapters on "People's Banks" and "Freedom of Exchange v. the Collective Bargain," con- tain much interesting information and acute reasoning. But by no methods, however sound, will society, in our belief, be permanently reformed in the absence of a steady spread of a finer and broader public spirit ; and, when all is said, the most powerful impulse to the spread of such a spirit lies in that intense belief in the brotherhood of man, and the reality and potentiality of his supernatural relationships, which Christianity alone of all creeds and philosophies supplies. It is Mr. Adderley's aim in his Looking Upward to impress upon Christians, whether clergy or laity, the utter inadequacy of their realisation of the meaning of their religion if it allows them to hold themselves aloof from practical contact with social problems, and to abstain from active efforts to leave the world around them better than they find it. As so aimed, his book contains much that is true and worth saying.
Previous page
