Thursday's Times contained its annual review of pauperism in London.
This year's report is most disappointing, especially so when we remember that the year has been a record one for trade and industry. According to the latest return, on December 14th the Guardians were providing indoor relief for 77,061 persons and outdoor relief for 33,231- a total of 110,292, or 24.4 per thousand of the population of London. The corresponding day of last year showed a total of 109,871, or 421 less. The great apparent decrease in pauperism shown in last year's figures was largely due to the removal of the pauper disqualification from the Old Age Pensions Act. This year's increase may be attri- buted partly to the labour troubles early in the year and to the London dock strike, which lasted from May to July, and brought into London a large addition to the number of casual labourers. At the same time it is impossible not to recognize the significance of the fact that in spite of old-age pensions, the labour bureaus, and all the " social reform " measures of the Government, pauperism is increasing. In 1900 the pauper i a' e was 22.8 per thousand. Now, as we have said, it is 24-4. But those figures alone do not by any means express the increase. Besides the 110,000 paupers at the present moment the 64,000 old-age pensioners contain a proportion of paupers, and there are many children now partly fed out of the school rate, and about 5,000 families maintained by Distress Committees out of the municipal rate. The proof is already strong that a system of doles does not remove paupers but creates them.
Previous page
