THE CRIMINAL TRAMP: A CRITICISM AND SUGGESTION.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SpiccrArog."1 • SIR,—While all your readers will agree in your denunciation in the Spectator of January 8th of "that particular anti-social yprson, the tramp," I venture to join issue as to the proposed remedy. You say "there is only one method of dealing with such a person,—compulsory detention and compulsory work." Now, this is the very policy that has been pressed upon Boards of Guardians by an instruction from the Local Government Board, dated February, 1896. This instruction has been generally acted upon, with results which show its inherent fallacy. Previous to that date attention had been called to the great increase of tramps applying for admission to the casual wards,—an increase due to depression in the building and shipbuilding trades. The purport of the instruction was to order a strict adherence to the provisions of the Act of 1882, which prescribes that "a casual pauper shall not be allowed to discharge himself from a casual ward before 9 a.m. of the second day after his admission." That is to say that any poor man who, being destitute, goes away to seek work (unless he can prove this to the satisfaction of all the workhouse masters on his route) shall be imprisoned for thirty-six hours with hard labour and much worse than prison fare at every place where he asks for shelter for a night.
Before we go further, we must lay it down as a cardinal fact that the professional (or, as you call him, the "criminal ") tramp rarely, if ever, condescends to enter the casual ward of a workhouse. So that their class, against whom all the machinery of "compulsory detention and compulsory work" is directed, is not touched by it at all. These "professionals" know how and where to beg, and how to " dodge " the police ; it is they who crowd the cheap lodging-houses, where they enjoy a good time. No hated tepid bath, no task work, no imprisonment with semi-starvation for these "anti-social persons, the free-lances of society." In proof of this I would give the following particulars of the number of those who applied for admission to the casual wards, and of those who slept in licensed lodging-houses in the town of Wellington, Somerset, during a period of three months (August to October), 1895. They were as follows :—Casnals admitted to the casual wards, 526; casuals who slept in the lodging houses, 1,152; or nearly two to one of the latter class— mostly "professionals."
Who, then, are those who are detained—i.e., imprisoned— for thirty-six hours on the merest pittance of food that will sustain life, and are discharged "on the morning of the second day" with nothing provided for their day's march ? They are mostly, if not 10:together, third or fourth class labourers, occasional workers when docks or railways or buildings demand extra hands, and their number varies in precise ratio with the depression or revival of trade. I would mention that I have peculiar facilities for making these observations, as I live on one of the great main roads, in fact the principal route, from London and the North to the
West of England, and vice-versci; and the following figures, taken from the police diary fully confirm the above state- ment as to the variation in numbers being due to depression or revival of trade:—Casuals applying for police orders, 1890-9/ (years of fairly good trade), 2,109; casuals applying for police orders, 1893-94 (years of depression), 4,705. Certainly the ad- ditional 2,596 applicants were not "professionals," but inferior workmen, who were the first to receive notice when trade became slack. I trust I have thus shown that the policy advocated by your article, and supported by the Local Government Board, punishes these inferior workmen, while "the criminal tramp" snaps his fingers at the "compulsory detention and compulsory work," for his acceptance of them is purely voluntary, dependent only on his conception of the morality or danger of begging.
I will now venture to suggest what I believe to be the only real remedy for this social canker. It is simply to make such arrangements as will take away the present excuse for beg- ging. This once done, the police and Magistrates could bring the law against begging into full effect. Their hands are now fettered by knowing that under the law as it exists at present every casual is compelled to beg within three or four hours of his discharge, as he is (as I observed) turned out on the world without any provision for his day's march to the next station. The increased severity of the present discipline intensifies the general reluctance felt towards the casual wards, and directly promotes both begging and sleep- ing in outhouses, as the following figures show, which in- clude all the police-stations in Somerset :—Casuals admitted twelve months before the stringent order, 25,062; casuals admitted twelve months after the stringent order, 19,789; or a decline of 21 per cent.; but note the obverse figures. During the latter period there was an increase of no less than 86 per cent. in police cases brought up for begging, and 39 per cent, in police cases brought up for sleeping out, showing that severity only drives more of these wanderers to adopt illegal practices. In conclusion, I desire earnestly to- advocate what many beside myself hold to be the sensible and right course of action, which is to consider our casual wards as merely self-supporting lodging-houses where a bed' and simple food should be obtainable for an equivalent value of work done. The maximum task now legal under the Poor- law for one night's lodging is "to break 4 cwt. of atones."' This would not only amply cover the cost of the present hard fare, but would provide a generous hunch of bread and cheese to be given on discharge. Our principle is that when a man has paid his bill he should be free to go on his way. Here is no misdirected punishment, nor is there any senti- mental charity. It is simply a business arrangement, but one which, while (like Nature) it treats alike the evil and the good, takes away all excuse for begging, whether with or without intimidation; and this being done, we must trust our police and Magistrates to bring the full weight of the law to' bear on those who act so as to merit the appellation a "criminal tramps." The present system of "compulsory detention and compulsory work" punishes the wrong man and not the " wrong-doer."—I am, Sir, &c., CHARLES H. Fox, J.P.,
Guardian of Wellington (Somerset) Union.
Previous page
