SUBJECTS DISCUSSED. 1. CHILDREN OF TRAMPS, BY COL. GERARD CLARK, Guardian of the Brentford Union 2. OLD AGE PENSIONS, BY MR CHARLES TRASK, Guardian of the Yeovil Union PAGE 46 63 FRIDAY, 14TH JULY 1899. The following were elected representatives on the Committee of Central Poor Law Conferences : : Mr I. HARDING, Chairman, Bedford Board of Guardians. Rev. Dr J. C. Cox, Chairman, Brixworth Board of Guardians. Mr ALBERT JULIAN PELL was unanimously re-elected Hon. Sec. of the South Midland District Poor Law Conferences. Rev. Dr Cox (Brixworth) said he regretted the small interest shown in the Conference, judging from the very few members present. In the matter of representation at the Conference the South Midland District was behind every other in the country. In the West Midland District there were 82 Unions, and 26 of them were represented at the Conference; in the South-Western District, of 79 Unions, 34 were represented; of the Northern, with 39 Unions, 20 Unions definitely appointed delegates; in North Wales, with 19 Unions, 16 sent representatives; and in the Northern District it was seldom that any Union was not represented. Whether that was due to the energy of Dr Rhodes or not, he did not know. With a good attendance, a Conference became a reality. At the last Conference at Hitchin, he believed that only six Unions were officially represented, though he noticed representatives from ten or more. The interest in the Con ference had of late years been very languid, and the time had come when they should consider whether they ought to wind up or adjourn for a few years. He only mentioned the matter in the hope that Mr Pell, the Hon. Sec., would do his best to get a good Committee to work heartily with him on broad general lines, and possibly they might then get a good attendance in the future. (Hear, hear.) Mr PELL was unanimously re-elected, and, in returning thanks, said Dr Cox had raised the question of the small attendance at the Conferences, and he most heartily agreed with him. It took considerable time and trouble to get up the Conferences, and it was very disheartening not to get better results. Matters were left too much to the Hon. Sec., and it was hardly fair to cast the whole burden on one man, and then to blame him because the result was not better. Dr Cox had said something about getting a more representative and enlightened Committee. He would like to point out to Dr Cox that the election of the Committee rested with the members, and not with the Hon. Sec. With the consent of the Conference, he would like to throw out a suggestion that some change should be made in the constitution and organisation of the Committee. For many years past it had been the custom in that Conference to elect only one representative from each county to serve on the Committee. That gave them a Committee of only eight members, and with such a small Committee and a large and scattered district it was very difficult to get a good attendance at the Committee meetings. The Committee left matters to the Hon. Sec., and said "ditto" to whatever he did. He wished to mention that he had received a letter from Mr William C. Woodford (Clerk of the Brixworth Board of Guardians) enclosing the following resolution, passed on 1st September 1898 by the Brixworth Board: "That the Brixworth Board of Guardians, from a desire to promote the efficiency of and to stir up more active interest in the Poor Law Conferences, request the Committee of the South Midland Conference to issue an annual circular to all the Chairmen and Clerks of the various Boards in their district, asking them to consult their Boards as to subjects and speakers at next Conference." Most of the District Committees were composed of two or three members from each Board, the Clerk and Chairman or other members of the Board. It was not for him to make any proposition, but simply to express the hope that some change might be made in the organisation of the Committee, and so secure a better attendance in the future. Mr CHANCE said he felt it a pity that there should be such a small attendance. As Secretary of the Central Poor Law Conference and the South-Eastern Poor Law Conference, he thought his experience might be of some use. In the South-Eastern District each county had three representatives to the Committee, and they were elected at the Annual Conference. Owing possibly to the large number thus obtained, they got a very good attendance at the Committee meetings, which were always held in London. The success of the NorthWestern Conference, to which Dr Cox had alluded, was mainly due to Mr Hagger, the Hon. Sec. of the Conference. If he (Mr Chance) could help the South Midland District in any way, he would be pleased to do so. (Hear, hear.) Rev. H. W. TAYLOR (St Albans) asked how many Committee meetings had been held, and how many members were present at the meetings? The HON. SEC. said he had not the permission of the Committee to make any statement on that point. Dr Cox said they could not vote in the dark. Had there been any meetings at all? Had the letter of the Brixworth Board been placed before the Committee? The HON. SEC. said he thought it better to leave the letter of the Brixworth Board to be considered by the Conference. As to the number of meetings of the Committee, he must ask members to be content with his previous answer. Dr Cox pressed for an answer. The CHAIRMAN said he thought they must accept the Hon. Sec.'s view of the question. Dr Cox said it was no use going into the past. Probably one Committee meeting in the year shortly before the Conference would be productive of good results. He did not wish it to go forth that it was impossible to get a good Conference in the South Midland District. There were many good Conferences in that district in the "seventies" and "eighties." He proposed that at the meeting which should be held some two months prior to the Conference, a representative of each Board should be invited to attend. That would be instead of a Committee. It was an experiment well worth trying. Mr HARDING (Bedford Union) seconded the proposition, which was carried in the following terms:-"That the Committee for the South Midland District for the ensuing year consist of the Chairman of each Board in the district, or of some member delegated by the Board; and that they shall be called to arrange the Conference at least two months before the Conference is held." The CHAIRMAN said he did not know whether it was expected that one who held that the position of Chairman at such a Conference should be thoroughly versed in the intricacies of the Poor Law system of the country. If it were so, he was afraid they would be disappointed, for he had only a slight acquaintance with the subject. The Poor Law administration of the country affected all classes of the community-those who were relieved, and those who had to bear the burden of the relief, and it was very important that Conferences should be held to debate subjects of such importance as those contained in the papers which would shortly be read. He entirely agreed with Dr Cox in regretting that these meetings were not better attended. Through the kindness of the Hon. Sec., Mr Pell, he had had an opportunity of reading the reports of some former Conferences. He observed that at the meeting at Oxford in 1894, under the presidency of Lord Jersey, some interesting statistics were given. In that year the population of England and Wales was 29,500,000, and the number of paupers 820,000, or a ratio of 27 per 1,000; now, with a population of 31,397,000, the number of paupers was 821,096, or a ratio of 26.2 per 1,000. The number of paupers in the South Midland District relieved in 1894 was 58,201, and in 1899, 56,991, and in view of the considerable increase in the population, such figures must be deemed very satisfactory. The ratio per thousand in the South Midland District ranged from 36.1 in Buckinghamshire to 16.1 in Middlesex, the average for the district being only 27 per 1,000 at the present time as compared with 30 per 1,000 in 1894. The position would not have been so favourable but for Middlesex, which has the lowest ratio per thousand of any district in England, being included. The figures for that district were eminently satisfactory and full of hope for the future. If they studied the returns of the whole counties, they would find that in 1858, when there was a population of only 19,000,000, the ratio of paupers per 1,000 was 48; in the present year, with a population of 31,000,000, it was only 26 per 1,000. It seemed to him one of the principal advantages of such Conferences was that practical men came from various districts with a knowledge of Poor Law administration, and that the theories of enthusiasts were brought to the touch of practical experience. Here also many misconceptions with regard to the Workhouse system could be cleared up. The effect of the writings of Dickens and others still remained long after the grievances of which they wrote had disappeared, and the sufferings of Oliver Twist, and the cruel indifference of Bumble, still lived in the imagination of many. The general idea of the Workhouse was that of a prison, where the destitute were taken in one day, given some oakum to pick and some skilly to drink, and turned out on the world the next. That was a grotesque view to those who had had the opportunity of visiting the Workhouses in their districts. It was quite true that the vagrant classes were treated with scant courtesy in the Workhouse, but he (the Chairman) could not conceive of a system under which the vagrant would receive much sympathy. The vagrant class was not a class which they wished to encourage in the country. On the other hand, those who through sickness or other misfortune now found themselves in the Workhouse were treated in a humane manner. But there was, in the rural districts at any rate, a deep-rooted antipathy amongst the deserving poor to the Poor Law administration of the present day. The poor objected to being branded as paupers; they objected to being incarcerated in Workhouses, and to having to herd with the lowest classes of society; to the supervision that was exercised over them if they received out-relief. Another objection was the inadequacy of out-relief, and the great desire, even among the poorest, to end their days amid their earlier surroundings. Those considerations were at the root of the growing demand for some other relief in old age than the present Poor Law affords. There had been a great deal of platform oratory on this subject of late by enthusiastic people, and when people became enthusiastic they often became extravagant. The promoters of some of the schemes were very ambitious. Some proposed that the pensions should be doled out to every one no matter what his income might be-there was an idea that the rich would refuse it not a very safe assumption. (Laughter.) Various schemes were laid before the Royal Commission on the subject, and to every one of them very great objections were made. He ventured to think that in relieving the aged poor they must take care that they did not cast upon the community an overwhelming burden. The great question was where the money would come from to pay the pensions. The rates could not be increased without very great opposition; the general taxation of the country was largely borne indirectly by the poorer classes, and they would object to paying pensions to people who did not need them. Proposals were made that the Government should avail itself of the Friendly Societies and work through them, but that would mean Government supervision of the Societies, and to some extent a Government guarantee of the Societies. The Friendly Societies strongly objected to the proposal. He did not think that any scheme should be introduced without considering the Friendly Societies, which contained the majority of the thrifty among the working classes. It seemed to him that the question should be narrowed down to what was desirable, possible, and necessary. They all wished to do whatever they could for the deserving poor. They wished to enable a man when old age overtook him, and he was no longer able to work, to live comfortably in his old home, to be freed from that anxiety which must haunt many a working man that, after his active years are spent, he will occupy the position of a pauper, and, at the best, receive the inadequate dole now known as outdoor relief, or perhaps be immured in a Workhouse with some of the least deserving members of society. Any one making even a superficial study of the question would recognise the enormous difficulty of the subject, and he would be sorry to pronounce any decided opinion upon it at that juncture. It would be most important for the Conference to carefully consider the question whenever any proposals were authoritatively laid before the country. He trusted that next year the Conference would be more representative. Colonel CLARK read the following paper : CHILDREN OF TRAMPS. BY COL. GERARD CLARK, AMONG English social problems there is none older or more difficult than that of vagrancy. Either to compel or induce the vagrant to abandon his trade, the severest penalties, even death, have been imposed in past times, and under the Vagrancy Act an incorrigible rogue and vagabond is still liable to a whipping and twelve months' hard labour, while the reports of Conferences teem with papers on the subject and all sorts of schemes have been suggested. There is, however, a strong |