THE

HE New-Poor-law was exposed to a severe trial, in the year 1837-8. The distress attendant upon a winter of uncommon inclemency, was aggravated by the high price of corn, and by the depression of the manufacturing and trading interests. And it appears also from the report to which we shall presently advert, that in some parts of the country, local and temporary causes unfavourable to the labourer were in operation. Under these circumstances the resistance, which the persons commissioned to enforce the law had to encounter, was becoming progressively formidable. The violation of vested rights which, it was contended, the measure involved, no less than the hardships which it inflicted, was theme, on which the promoters of agitation expatiated in language which it is needless to characterize, but which found too ready an echo among the masses to whom it was addressed. In the northern parts of the country, more particularly, these appeals to the passions of the exasperated populace were answered by violence and outrage, and a new field for sedition was opened for demagogues, who sinking all ordinary party topics, avowed no other design than the abolition of the new Poor-law. For that object they invited the co-operation alike, of Whigs, Tories, and Radicals.*

a

The following are specimens of the eloquence employed by the anti-poor

Few of those who were appealed to, upon such occasions, stopped to question the fictions, or to sift the exaggerations which were as industriously circulated as they were greedily received; few thought of considering whether the alleged sufferings of the poor were exclusively produced by a particular system, rather than incidental to the universal condition of society, as it now exists. The enormous abuses of the old order of things were either forgotten, or unknown, and the great moral results, at which the advocates of the new law, are steadily aiming, were of course unintelligible to the many.

At the same time, as we have

law demagogues. A certain rev. Mr. spoke in the following strain-"If this Stephens, at a meeting at Manchester, bill were established it should be eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, wife for wife, child for child, man for man, and blood for blood." At Stockport on the 6th of February 1838 the same reverend person related the following story. A

man, whom he had never seen before, had come to him from an agricultural district, and told him that he was seeking for work, but that he would not be separated from his wife, and that he had a knife ready for any guardian who should attempt to part his wife and himself. At Rochdale the same individual said, "If it were right to confiscate the property of the people, by abrogating the 43rd of Elizabeth, it would be right for the poor to take a dagger

in one band, and a torch in the other, and do the best for themselves."

Mr. Oastler and Mr. Feargus O'Connor were in the habit of addressing si milar language to the populace.

already remarked," the benefits of the alteration were becoming more and more perceptible; and of the educated classes, there were few, who did not recognize the justice of, at least, the principle of the bill. Among the clergy in particular there had originally existed a feeling unfavourable to the measure; but the commissioners now inform us that they are rapidly gaining adherents from among that body, whose situation and experience must give an indisputable authority to their opinions on any subject connected with the situation and interests of the poor.

The sentiments which prevailed in Parliament will be gathered from the brief account, which we are about to give of what took place upon the subject. So early as the 27th of November 1837, Lord John Russell obtained a select Committee to enquire into the operation of the new law. But this afforded little satisfaction to the opponents of the measure, and Mr. Fielden, (member for Oldham) moved, on the 20th of February, for a repeal of the Act itself. He was seconded by Mr. Wakley; but as the speeches of these gentlemen consisted of little but ex parte statements of particular grievances, collected from all quarters, and supported by no sufficient evidence, they do not require to be particularly noticed. In the course of the evening a discussion ensued, in which Lord Howick, Mr. Liddell, Mr. Clay, Mr. Darby, Lord John Russell, and Sir Robert Peel, took part. These gentlemen concurred in the general impolicy of taking any steps in the question, until the

• Vol. lxxix. 241.

Committee should have made its report. The inexpediency of disturbing the main principles of the bill, seemed also to be generally admitted, and the question between them rather was, how far, consistently with the maintenance of those principles, any considerable relaxation of the apparent severity of some of the provisions of the act could be introduced.

Sir Robert Peel, in particular, bore testimony to the merits of the bill, remarking, that on the whole, he was bound to say, considering the magnitude of the experiment, which had been but four years under trial, that it was as satisfactory as any man could expect. The sense of the House was suthiciently declared by the divisions which followed. The first took place on the "previous question," which was moved by Mr. Harvey, and negatived by 321, to 13. The House then divided on the question that leave be given to bring in the bill-Ayes 17: Noes 309: Majority 292.

On the 12th of March, the Bishop of Exeter presented a petition to the House of Lords from the Guardians of the Dudley Union, complaining that the diet prescribed by the Poor-law Commissioners was not adequate to the proper support of the paupers. We subjoin the "dietary table," the subject of the petition, as read by the right reverend Prelate.*

"Dudley Union diet table for ablebodied male paupers "

"On three days of every week-21oz. bread, 34 oz. cheese, and 14 pint of gruel per diem.

"On one other day-20oz. bread, 14oz. cheese, 14 pint of soup, and 11 pint of gruel.

"On two other days-5oz. cooked

After some desultory remarks from Lords Brougham, Melbourne, and Winchelsea; Lord Radnor came to the point by remarking that the best way to arrive at an opinion on the subject, would be to compare the food obtained by an able bodied labourer, when in work, with that furnished in the workhouse. He calculated accordingly, that the family of an agricultural labourer in Berkshire would subsist on 114 ounces of solid food, per week, whilst a similar family in the workhouse would get 137 ounces. From another statement he bad in his possession, he computed a difference in favour of the paupers in Dudley workhouse of 31lb. 114oz. weekly. Captain Parry's crew at the North Pole, also received and consumed a less amount of solid food per man, by 230z.; not to mention 4lbs. of potatoes allowed to the paupers at Dudley. Nay, according

meat. 11b. potatoes or other vegetables, 14oz of bread, 14oz. cheese, and 1 pint of gruel.

On one other day 4oz. bacon, 1lb. potatoes or other vegetables, 14oz. of bread, 1oz. cheese, and 14 pint of gruel."

The City of London Union diet table, was placed in juxta-position with the above document, and exhibited a far more liberal scale, giving 7oz. of meat, on three days of the week, on three other days, instead of meat, 14 pint of good soup, besides a handsome allow ance of beer, bread and vegetables.

The ordinary diet table of St. Georges Hospital gives :

"Breakfast: 1 pint of tea, pint of

milk.

"Dinner: 6oz. roasted meat (weighed with the bone before it is dressed) and a pound of potatoes.

Supper; 1 pint of gruel, and pint of milk, 12oz. of bread, and 1 pint of beer daily."

to the dietary table of the establishment at that place, the female paupers received twenty per cent. more solid food, than had been sufficient for Captain Parry and his men on the Arctic expedition.

In the House of Lords, however, Lord Stanhope was the principal declaimer against the new order of things, and a motion of his lordship's, on the 20th of March, gave Lord Brougham an opportunity of delivering a most convincing and argumentative speech upon the subject. The learned lord, on this occasion, thoroughly sifted the question, and stripped it of the fallacies, the exaggerations, and the misapprehensions with which it is beset. The subject, from time to time came before either House of Parliament; and, it is probable, that the discussions which there took place, as well as the agitation of the subject out of doors, may have a salutary effect in superinducing a careful revision of the system, and a mitigation, for the present, of some of its apparently

harsher features.

But, upon this head the Commissioners themselves are very reluctant to make any concessions.

According to their experience, very small infractions of principle open the door to practices which at once render nugatory all their schemes for elevating the condition of the labouring poor. In their report, which is dated the 4th of August, 1838, they advert to the principal modifications which, it had been suggested, should be made the subject of experiment, and the following is the substance of their statement.

The expediency of relaxing, in certain cases, and under special circumstances, the regulation which

prohibits the giving of out-door relief to able-bodied male paupers had, independently of the peculiar pressure of last winter, been the subject of their careful consideration. Several relaxations had been proposed.

1. It had been suggested, that it might be advisable to authorise the guardians to relieve the families of labourers by taking one or more of their children into the workhouse. But the objection to this was, "that in the practical application of this exception, it would be difficult to avoid the establishment of a system similar in principle to the scale-system, i. e., a regular allowance, in addition to the labourer's earnings, depending on the number of his children, and the rate of wages."

2. It had also been proposed to obviate the hardship of obliging a man to part with his cottage and furniture, and take up his abode, with his family, in the workhouse, by admitting the head of the family only into that establishment, and leaving his family at home. Their objection to this plan is stated by the commissioners in the following terms:-" The small degree of inconvenience sustained by the labourer by a temporary sojourn in the workhouse, whilst his wife and family continue at home, ceases altogether to have the effect upon the employer which is produced by the strict workhouse system, namely; the creating a great reluctance, on his part, to lose temporarily the services of the labourer, lest he should find it impossible to regain them; and a desire, so to arrange the work of his farm, as to afford employment, during the unfavourable part of the season, to those upon whose assistance he must rely for the ne

cessary services during the more active periods of the year."

The report then proceeds to notice other particulars of the system.

With respect to the migration of families from the southern to the northern counties, the commissioners state, that by reason of the embarrassments in the manufacturing districts, and the general commercial depression, it had not been carried on to a material extent since the date of their last report.

The number of those who, hav. ing previously migrated, returned to their parishes, did not exceed five per cent. upon the whole number of the "migrants," the far greater proportion of whom had attained" circumstances of comparative independence and comfort."

The number of poor persons assisted to emigrate abroad, by means of parish funds, had not been so large as in the year preceding. The disturbances in North America had the effect of diverting to the Australian colonies the course of whatever emigration did take place. With regard to the financial side of the question, they computed that the new law had already relieved the country from a direct annual taxation of nearly 2,300,000l.

The report observes, that the most important and characteristic circumstance of the last twelve months had been the extreme severity of a very long winter, and the continuance of the interruption to manufacturing industry, which commenced in the year 1836-7. Although, in various Unions, the doubts of the guardians, and their apprehensions, that the workhouse would be filled, induced them to

apply for a relaxation of the rule prohibiting out-door relief to ablebodied male paupers, and although the commissioners, for the most part, consented to such applications, the total amount of outdoor relief thus afforded, was so limited as to lead them to believe, that, with the exception of a few instances, it might have been safely withheld.

In their third annual report,* they had stated, that there were at that time 1329 parishes in England and Wales which had not been united, or placed under the management prescribed by the act. Since that period they had to announce the formation of 17 Unions, comprising 264 parishes.

The parishes that still continued incorporated under Gilbert's act, were 283, and they complain, that unless additional facilities should be afforded them for the dissolution of these, as it were, rival Unions, they can entertain no expectation of completing the local organization of the country in the way contemplated by the poor-law amendment act. To the principle on which the Gilbert Act Unions are managed, they repeat their objections, considering that it neither tends to discourage pauperism among the able-bodied poor, nor affords to the really destiute the certainty of adequate relief.

Some valuable papers appear in the Appendix, and, in particular, a very striking report from Mr. Tufnell, the assistant commissioner for Kent and East Sussex. In enumerating the causes of the distress that had prevailed in Kent during the year, this gentleman affords some information, which

• See the last volume, p. 129,

may serve to explain the hostility of one very powerful class of tradesmen-the keepers of public houses-to the new order of things. He says, that the passing of the beer bill, and the enormous multiplication of beer-shops consequent upon it, stimulated the cnltivation of hops to a degree, which even the increased demand for the article could not sustain. The poor-law bill came suddenly to counter-act the evil effects of the beer-bill, and beer-shops were observed to decrease as rapidly as they had before spread themselves over the country. This change affected the prosperity of the hop-growers, and led to considerable distress amongst the labouring classes, whose sufferings were augmented by the high price of corn, unaccompanied, as it was, by any corresponding rise in wages.

Mr. Tufnell, in the course of his report, mentions some singular instances of the efficacy of a "test," in the cases of able-bodied applicarts for relief. Among others cited by him, the cases of Faversham and Queenborough, contiguous towns, are very remarkable.

In the former of these places out-door relief was given to the able-bodied during the worst part of the winter, without any endeavour to test, by an offer of employment, the alleged destitution of the applicants; and the result was, that 139 working men, amounting, with their wives and families, to 549 individuals, found themselves in the receipt of unconditional and gratuitous relief. At Queenborough, on the other hand, whose situation, in respect of population and employment, is precisely similar-or if there be any difference, it is in favour of Faversham-a test, by no means