THE ABOLITION OF THE POOR LAW.
[To THZ EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOH."1 SIM,—It may not he widely known that at the annual meeting of the Association of Poor Law Unions in England and Waled, held Iii London hi November last, the following resolution was sub- mitted to the Conferonte and tarried with only one dissentient :—
"That the Association of Poor Law Unions in England and
Wales, representing by direct election 556 "Unions and a population of over 34,000,000, strongly protests against the action of the Government in constituting a Sub-Committee of the Reconstruc- tion Committee to consider and report upon the steps to be taken to ensure the better co-ordination of Public Assistance in England and Wales . .. without appointing representatives of the Associa- tion on such Sub-Commirtoe, and the Association calls upon the Government to remedy without delay such a grave defect in the constitution of the Sub-Committee."
In the little book entitled Poor Law Reform, by Charles Booth, which contains appendices by Dr. A. Downes and Miss Octavio Hill, the following cogent reasons against the break-up of the existing Poor Law system, and the transference of its work to other already overburdened authorities, are briefly stated. Mr. Booth writes:— " That we have already gone far in the concentration of local administration does not prove that we shall do well to go further. We may easily overdo it. Sanitary measures, public health and police go well together. . . but the ecale seems to me to turn against the interference of the County or County Borough Coun- cil, With rate-aided employment as a cure for destitution from lack of work, and-to lay upon these authorities the whole adminis- tration of the Poor Law, would, I think, be unwise. . . . The action of the Poor Law is not only distinct, but for the most part fundamentally divergent in character from the other public services mentioned."
From Dr. Downee's memorandum I quote the following :— "I view with grave misgiving the wholesale and imminent disruption of existing agencies, and the transference of the work of relief to a complicated and untried system of machinery."
And Miss Octavio Hill says:— " A Statutory Committee of the County Council seems to me to be open to the following objections :—(1) It tends to the munici- palization of the Poor Law. (2) It is comparatively untried machinery. (3) It is at beet composed mainly of those elected for other duties and already overweighted with work."
Seven years' experience as a member of a Board of Guardians has c,onviaced me that the conclusions arrived at by the above- named well-known persons still hold good. As your correspondent Mr. F. Hue Williams remarks, "vast improvements have taken place in the administration of Poor Law." This improvement is progressive, and will, we hope, soon embrace the branches still in urgent need of reform, such as the administration of Outdoor Relief, in its relation to widows with children and the aged poor. The machinery is all in working order and the large army oi experienced voluntary workers already mobilized.
surely the Public Assistahce, or the Relief of Destitution, fez in substance the titles are interchangeable, may be safely trustec to the Poor Law Guardians, who in the past have given so much time and have worked so unobtrusively and gratuitously in the interest of the poor, and in the endeavour to carry out faithfully their dual responsibility to them and to the public whose elected
representatives they are.—I am, Sir, &c., M. E. B.
(A. Woman Poor Law Guardian).
[A special meeting of the Aseociation of Poor Law Unions held in London on May 3rd passed another resolution similar to the one Mentioned by our correspondent. On this occasion there were two dissentients.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
