A Great Social Problem

Joshua Harrison Stallard

[Reprinted from Gentlemen's Magazine, April 1869]

It can scarcely be doubted that a spirit of pure empiricism lies at the foundation of English character, and is a peculiarity of English legislation. We boast of being what is called a practical people. We trouble ourselves very little about causes or principles, hence we are fond of compromise, and prefer political mending and social patchwork to fundamental changes, even when it is acknowledged we are wrong. Let a hole in our political or social garment be fairly seen, and no matter how rotten the cloth, how obsolete the cut, how ill adapted the fit to present circumstances, we set about industriously to mend it with the newest and often most unsuitable materials, altogether forgetful that we may be carrying into practice the well-known parable, and making the rent worse than it was before. We might illustrate these observations by reference to recent action, both in Church and State. Bishops, clergy, and laity have had their rest disturbed and their passions roused by the lighting of a few candles at communion. Thousands have been spent in the endeavour to put them out. But does any reasonable person imagine that the errors they are supposed to represent will be extinguished with the candles, or that the gratification of such a childish whim is likely seriously to affect the progress of truth and practical religion? Under panic of invasion, also, we are erecting fortifications which will cost us millions, without remembering that the true defence of a nation consists in the spirit and organization of a prosperous and healthy people. At the present moment we could, in a single day, raise earthworks at any threatened point sufficient to cover every effective gun we possess, and every trained artilleryman we could find to work them.

But of all the subjects which have been treated empirically with sad results, the relief of the poor and destitute is incomparably the worst. For centuries we have been persistently treating symptoms instead of the causes which produce them. We have looked to an unlimited exercise of benevolence for the cure of poverty and want We have been taught to give as if it were the test of our love to God and man. Under these teachings our ancestors have raised an unassailable fabric of 40,000 endowed charities with an income of not less than 2,000,000 per annum. These, instead of mitigating want, have immeasurably increased it. There is scarcely a parish in England in which there is not an institution for teaching the poor to beg, and it is generally the last which ought to be devoted to such an unholy purpose. Go to St George's Church, Hanover Square, on any Friday morning, and its aisles will be seen crammed with poor. They attend "not to see the miracle, but to eat of the loaves and be filled." They are found there on no other week-day. The charities of Coventry, Stafford, Henley, Bedford, Salisbury, and Canterbury, create more poor than they relieve.

In the last-named cathedral town Mr. Gladstone drew a fearful picture of the evils produced, and stated that keepers of brothels were not unfrequently relieved. At Stafford, a cart goes regularly round the town, delivering a hundred-weight of coals to every house, and commences the following year at the point where it last left off. At Kempton, in Oxfordshire, fivepence each is delivered on a certain day to every resident who chooses to apply. 1677 persons, out of a population of 2241, took his dole. It is worthy of remark that the village is situated at the top of a hill, and that the distribution takes place at the bottom, near a public-house. It is needless to say that not a farthing ever reaches the top of the hill. Curiously, also, the charity was defended by the clergyman who dispensed it, who said he liked to see the people enjoy themselves. In certain cities the members of Parliament are practically returned by the trustees of charities, and at this moment a contest is said to be going on in Exeter for the appointment of trustees, in which the political element plays a conspicuous part. With such evidence before us, is it not extraordinary that we should have continued so long to reverence the foolish whims of people who 01* their death beds thought they were compounding for their sins? It is indeed time that all eleemosynary endowments should be consolidated under the authority which administers relief to the destitute in order that the funds may be judiciously applied to their legitimate purpose, and not, as now, to the promotion of begging, imposture, and the degradation of the poor.

But in addition to these endowed charities, we have ourselves raised up a vast number of charitable institutions supported by voluntary contributions, and largely administered through the instrumentality of paid officials. These institutions profess to deal with every form of human wretchedness, every malady, both of mind and body, and every disorder of our social system. It was an excellent observation of a distinguished French philanthropist, that the charity which gives in gold is least deserving of the name. Man shall not live by bread alone. The most perfect ministration to his physical wants is not all that he requires. The deepest distresses are not soothed by money, but kind words and sympathising looks soften the hardest pillow. It is a sad characteristic of English charitable institutions that they sever the giver and recipient On the part of the giver there is no sense of personal sacrifice, of service rendered, and of benefit conferred. On the part of the recipient there is no opportunity for gratitude, and no interchange of those kindly sentiments which are as necessary to the education of the rich as they are to the elevation of the poor. Such charity has lost its double blessedness. It is startled into fits of enthusiasm by die horrors of a plague, or by a dearth of work. It is aroused by advertisements and circulars. Millions are poured into the coffers of a thousand institutions, with a sort of general and indefinite hope that good will come. Subscription lists of noble Christians are paraded in reports, and amongst them are many who never saw a pauper dwelling, and never gave up one moment's pleasure to the welfare of the poor.

And, lastly, we have a gigantic and costly State machinery for dealing with pauperism and crime, on principles which from their nature, are only applicable when the evils are developed, and, for the most part, beyond the possibility of cure. Here, too, there is an almost total absence of all that is human. From the first moment of distress, the pauper is brought in contact with a cold and heartless system. There is no one to relieve him from the pain and degradation of laying bare his wants before the relieving officer, or of parading them before a board of guardians. Admitted to a workhouse, he is associated with the lowest and vilest of his kind. His master is paid, the matron is paid, the doctor is paid, the nurse is paid, and even the clergyman is paid. Disinterested philanthropy is almost entirely absent No wonder that Christian ministers hold themselves aloof from this heartless organisation. They generally condemn its inefficiency, and try to supplement its miserable shortcomings by measures of their own, which consume their valuable time, and seriously interfere with the efficacy of their spiritual ministrations. Whilst Christian people, excluded from all share in the public system of relief, are driven to the distribution of tracts and soup tickets, which breed contempt instead of gratitude, because they have no obvious relation to the relief required.

It may be safely stated, that misery and crime cost twenty millions annually, and that they, nevertheless, increase. Pauperism has advanced out of all proportion to the increase of population, particularly in the large and prosperous towns, where the demand tot labour has been greatest Since the repeal of the com laws, the total amount annually expended in relief to the poor has gone up from less than five to nearly seven millions, and from [unreadable] per head of the population to 6s. 6\d.

It is, however, in the metropolis that pauperism has assumed most serious proportions. The mean number of paupers relieved at one time was 71,513 in 1858, and 132,400 in 1867. At the present time there are generally 150,000 on relief. As the same people are not continuously relieved, it may be fairly stated that more than half a million persons are publicly assisted in the Metropolis in the course of half a year. In addition to those we have, according to the estimate of Dr. Guy, 75,000 beggars, tramps, and thieves, who prey upon society to the extent of 1,368,750/. a year.

But the evil is made still worse by its unequal distribution. During the half year ending Lady-day, 1868, the 75,000 rich inhabitants of Paddington relieved 842 persons in the workhouse ... For the actual relief of this number of poor for the whole year they contributed 20,928/., which, deducting the number of paupers, was [unreadable] per head of the population. The money was raised by a rate of [unreadable] in the pound.

But in Whitechapel the 78,000 poor inhabitants relieved during the same time, 3361 persons in the workhouse, and 20,510 out -- total, 23,639, or nearly one-third of the population. Besides these, 8682 tramps were also relieved in the casual wards. The annual expenditure for relief was 44,492/, which was raised by a rate of 31. 41/. in the pound, and, deducting the number of paupers, gives an average of [unreadable] for each inhabitant.

These contrasts are sufficiently alarming, but elsewhere matters are in a still worse state. In some districts of the parish of St George the Martyr, Southwark, more than half the ratepayers are depriving themselves of the necessaries of life in order to pay the rates, which amount to [unreadable] in the pound; whilst in St. George's in the East 500 houses are empty, and property of a certain class is absolutely worthless.

Meantime, it has been roughly estimated that the fund annually subscribed for charitable purposes in the Metropolis amounts to seven millions. If properly and economically expended, there is more than sufficient to ensure every one from want. Yet a death [unreadable] is recorded weekly, and thousands dwindle and perish for want of wholesome and sufficient food. It cannot be doubted that this enormous expenditure has impaired the industrial energies of the people, has weakened their powers of self-help, and shaken the bonds of personal sympathy between the rich and poor. Charity in money cannot grapple successfully with any form of destitution. No evil, for example, has attracted more attention, or excited a wider sympathy, than the neglected condition of the destitute and homeless children. Without exaggeration, it maybe said that there are 100,000 whose homes are wretched, and whose school is in the street. Gigantic efforts have been made to raise funds. Royalty has been enlisted in the laying of foundation stones. Forty institutions are doing their best to grapple with the evil; but, after all, less than 5000 victims are at this moment under treatment.

It is obvious, however, that this is not the way to set about the cure. Indeed, the public may be congratulated upon so great a failure. The cost of raising homes and refuges to the extent required would be tolerable as compared with the result We should have created a larger evil -- we should have put a premium on parental neglect -- we should have loosened the ties of parental love -- and we should have destroyed parental responsibility.

But the folly of this tinkering system is not confined to charity. Parliament never passed a more demoralising measure than the Houseless Poor Act It was bad enough, doubtless, to observe the wretched vagrants sleeping on the door-steps, and to know that they preferred to die in the cold and windy archways to entering the workhouse. But the enactment of a right to food and lodging without reference either to the previous circumstances which led to destitution, or to the possible future of the applicant; to offer it moreover in such a way as to foster the spirit of vagrancy by enabling the vagrant to pursue his wretched calling under the aegis of the law; in fact, to provide him with a convenient network of hotels, was sure to produce a greater evil than it was intended to relieve. Throughout the country vagrancy has enormously increased, and in the metropolis where 600 per night were entertained six years ago, there are more than 3000 now.

The question of what is to be done must be seriously entertained. It is absolutely ruinous to let this cancerous ulcer pursue its course unchecked. In a few years neither property nor person will be safe. When Hyde Park railings were pulled down, we had a specimen of brutal force not to be forgotten; and some who know the temper of the East End poor, are not devoid of fear, should the pressure of their miseries exceed endurance point To be successful, however, in our treatment, we must be careful lest we are again misled as to the cause. There are those who would persuade us that the evil is unavoidable in old established states, in which they afford there is a tendency for population to increase faster than the means of subsistence and employment Considering that we now feed thirty millions of people more easily and cheaply than we did ten millions less than a century ago, we may dismiss the question of subsistence. And if the theorists propose to limit increase by artificial means, it is only necessary to remind them that nature replaces the want of individual perfection by increased numbers; and that misery weakness and depravity increase the population just in proportion to the amount of physical injury they cause.

And with respect to the means of profitable employment, where is the limit fixed? Who would have ventured to prophesy that the necessity could have arisen, within the present generation, for the creation of so large a number of steam-engines and other machinery of immense productive power -- the existence of which so far than diminishing the field of exertion, has in its turn created a demand for labour far surpassing the wildest dreams of the most inspired enthusiast. After this he would be bold, indeed, who should place a limit on the amount of profitable work remaining to be done.

But, in fact, is not accumulated wealth the result of a productive population, and accumulating wealth the measure of the present reward open to successful industry? In no place in the world has wealth increased so much or so rapidly as in England, and especially in London. Where is the reward of labour so certain or so great? Tailors, shoemakers, artisans, stalwart labourers, men of ability and power in every department of human action, are attracted to it but the superior rate of wage as compared with that obtainable in the country districts. Thousands of foreigners annually forsake their poor, but happily not pauperised, homes, and find comfort, independence, and often luxury in a city where starvation takes its weekly victim, and want notoriously prevails. Whilst this is the case, it cannot be said with truth that the population presses upon the opportunity of employment; nay, rather, does it not go to prove that the greater is the number of producers the greater ought to be the comfort and happiness of all concerned? We have the problem therefore still before us. Why is it, that with a concentrated population and accumulating wealth, we have at the same time increasing pauperism?

It seems, indeed, a monstrous proposition to state that progress and a high rate of wages go hand in hand with pauperism. Yet such is undoubtedly the fact Rich and industrious communities invariably pay more poor-rates than those which are poor and deficient in profitable resources.

The rich parish of Maxylebone pays more to the poor-rate than the whole of Oxfordshire; and the parish of Lambeth 6000/. per annum more than Bedfordshire. Whitechapel is the residence of the industrial classes, and pays more to the poor-rate than the whole of Herefordshire. The small union of Holbom, covering 164 acres, and containing 40,000 inhabitants, pays one thousand per annum more for the relief of the poor, than the county of Westmoreland, which is nearly a quarter of a million acres in extent, and contains 60,000 people. The same little union pays nearly twice as much as Rutland ; although there is not a labourer or artisan in Holbom, who, if industrious and trustworthy, cannot earn, with greater certainty and ease, three times the wages that he could in any of the counties named.

The advocates of this theory of over-population look to emigration as the legitimate cure of pauperism. But is not this remedy even more unwisely empirical than all the rest? No country in the world will agree to receive our paupers; and to transport a million able and independent men, would but increase the relative proportion of the classes who do not earn their salt. Emigration simply emasculates the country of its really productive element. It takes away the very flower of the operative classes, whose presence here confers a far wider advantage upon humanity than can be gained by their expatriation. It leaves a heavier burden of weakness, blindness, impotence, idleness, drunkenness and vice, to be provided for by a fewer number of honest, industrious, and frugal persons. Emigration is the natural remedy for over-population, where population is equally productive and the competition fair. Under these circumstances, the question is one for the consideration of individuals, and may be left to the spread of intelligence, teaching people where in the world the most comfort may be obtained by the least exertion. So far from relieving pauperism, emigration must inevitably make it worse.

So likewise it has been asserted that derangements of the money and labour markets are causes of pauperism, which of necessity will require relief. If so, we may indeed despair, for whilst the opportunity of employment depends so largely on the profit which capital requires, it is absolutely certain that large masses of people will be thrown out of work from time to time by the introduction of machinery, the transference of manufactures to more convenient localities, fiscal changes, and a hundred other causes over which the labourer has no control. But, in fact, is not the question again reduced to one of personal resource? There are thousands of individuals of whom we may certainly predict that no matter how fierce the storm, they will escape the wreck. We can do such persons no greater injury than by leading them to expect salvation from without? All attempts to deal with the question empirically must fail. We must teach the workman to expect such difficulties, and provide him as far as possible with the means of meeting them without the sacrifice of independence.

The same line of argument may also be taken, with respect to other circumstances which are acknowledged to contribute labour to the growth of pauperism. The state of the dwellings of the poor affords a most prominent example. There are in every district houses into which the flow of public and private charity is [unreadable]. They are pauper-factories which turn out thousands to prey upon the rates. They are schools in which the resources of idleness and charity are industriously taught, and in which the sufferings of penury are learned not only to be endured, but liked. And yet we are bound to recognise the fact that the state of the home depends fax more upon the character of the inhabitants than upon the construction of the house. How often is the advantage of a convenient and cleanly apartment destroyed by the filthy and disgusting habits of the tenants; and on the contrary, how rarely does a decent family fail to make or obtain accommodation suited to their wants and habits? Cause and effect undoubtedly react upon each other but both bring us to the foundation of the evil; which is, defect of either physical or moral development, or both combined.

To these elementary causes, every form of pauperism may undoubtedly be traced; nay, crime, insanity, imbecility and [unreadable] are also largely due to them. How important that we should be made to feel their influence and power. "Mens sana in coipore sano" is the very foundation of individual character and of social order and prosperity. Nor is this happy state of mind and body so difficult to find. It is the certain result of habits of temperance and industry, combined with the external conditions of morality and health. Although difficulties may occasionally present themselves in hereditary traits; education, in the full sense of the term, is capable of effecting dually all we want. Given a man with a healthy mind and body and we may guarantee that he will be honest, frugal, prudent, independent; and whilst ever ready to accept the solace of his … friends, that he will prefer to suffer rather than … material aid. Such men rise to independence as … the surface of the stream. Difficulties vanish before them. Want of employment is a bugbear. They feel instinctively the scope of profitable industry as the philosopher feels the [unreadable] knowledge. For such men capitalists have never ceased to [unreadable] because the profit on their industry is never determined by their … of wage. These are the men who save for a rainy day, and look forward to the time when they -shall no longer work. The prospect of trouble does not ruffle them, because provision has been made for it.

Turn, on the other hand, and observe the nature of the materials of which the pauper class is formed. The breeding is [unreadable]. The principles of natural selection, thwarted by human interference fail to obviate the tendency to degradation.

[A long paragraph, unreadable, is not reproduced here]

… Then arises the inexorable necessity of depending on others for support. Such is the physical history of a large mass of pauperism ; such are the causes of its continual accumulation.

This physical aspect of the question is, moreover, more important than the moral, inasmuch as it is necessarily preliminary thereto. Existence is the prime necessity. Self-presentation is the first law in nature. Food and shelter stand before every other consideration upon earth, and the want of them forms the most serious temptation to robbery and crime. It would never do to put a starving man to the last extremity. If the condition of the criminal be made more eligible than that of the destitute, there would be a premium put on crime. The policy of relieving destitution is justified as much by selfish considerations as humane. Nor is it wise or politic to let the poor sink into absolute destitution before we help them. The downward course is always, unfortunately, the easier. It is fifty times easier to convert an independent man into a pauper, than to raise a pauper into a state of independence. Want of food soon destroys both physical and mental energy; it is no remedy for idleness, and cannot long be relied upon as a stimulus to work. An industrious man may soon have his health and productive capacity destroyed by starvation, or by trifling distresses, which may, at their outset, be easily relieved. And one tempted by want into the commission of a single crime, may be induced to live thereby. From the costly slough of sickness, pauperism, and crime, the escape is both difficult and doubtful.

The physical are also much more closely mixed up with the moral causes of pauperism than is generally supposed. Amongst the latter are chiefly ignorance, idleness, extravagance, improvidence, drunkenness, dishonesty, untruthfulness, selfishness, and moral cowardice.

These cannot be dealt with without first providing the bare means of existence and the power to work. Thus it is impossible to educate a starving people. A badly fed labourer is like a steam-engine with a short supply of fuel, which creeps along a level, but is brought to a stand-still by an ascending gradient If the physical capacity only suffices to procure the bare necessaries of existence from hand to mouth, where is the opportunity for frugality and forethought? No amount of prudence and self-denial will enable a Dorset labourer to fulfil his duties as a man, nor save him from the workhouse. He rushes into matrimony to gratify his brutish instincts, almost the only ones which cannot be thoroughly repressed. Nor can one quarrel with the drunkard who goes to the public-house to relieve by a fleeting stimulant the intolerable depression caused by debility, unwholesome dwellings, and want of food. Lastly, it is acknowledged that dishonesty and untruthfulness are the effects of idleness, whether induced by habit simply or by physical defect.

Whilst, however, the importance of food and physical development requires to be much more fully recognised, the moral causes must not be let alone. We have not space to do them justice now. It may be marked, however, that it is just as difficult to feed the ignorant and idle as to teach the starving. To do so, would but confirm them in their unhappy and dependent state. The body, the habits, and the mind must be fed equally and together, in order to ensure a real advance towards independence. Still moral defects exist alike in the healthy and well fed; but in this case happily the treatment, though simplified, is the same. We know perfectly that the very moral qualities by which we desire to regulate the conduct are capable of being taught, not however by preaching, or the acquisition of knowledge, but by habitual practice. Merely to tell a child to be industrious, is to make a fool of him. To set him on simple work is to place him in the path which leads to independence. Health and the habit of industry are the two essentials for a working man ; without them intellect and knowledge are too often thrown away. There is now a tendency to over-estimate the value of a superficial education, and to decry the employment of children. Such education tends to make the habit of work contemptible, the more so as it presents the temptation of gratifying the artificial wants by clever and dishonest means. In this respect the introduction of machinery may be regarded as an evil. In olden times every English homestead was a school of work. From the cottage to the castle, children were taught to spin, weave, knit, and sew, and the males to shoot This was an education in itself, and something like it needs to be restored.

In conclusion, it may be remarked that I have omitted intellectual ignorance from the list of causes. In doing so I have no wish to undervalue it. Hereafter it may be difficult to find employment for simple, honest, industry. Intellectual cultivation will then become an equal necessity with health and will to work. There is, however, less fear of its neglect The tendency of the time is to despise the foundations of independence, and to erect a building which, being unwisely developed in its uppermost story, is liable to topple over into crime. We may thus venture to affirm: -

1. That pauperism, though aggravated by vicious social arrangements and erroneous legislation, is mainly the result of defective moral, intellectual, and physical development, and cannot be treated without continual reference to the causes which produce it.

2. That education, physical and moral, in the widest sense of the word, combined with the external conditions of morality and health, is the only means of cure.

3. In our treatment of poverty and distress of every kind we must carefully abstain from every operation which is calculated to lower the physical and moral state of the poor.

4. That our efforts, to be successful, must be directed to a gradual improvement in the physical and moral conditions of the degraded classes, our remedies being applied equally, slowly, simultaneously, and perseveringly to all defects, and with the object of prevention rather than of cure.

On a future occasion it will be desirable to see in what respects the administration of public and private charity and the Poor Law contravenes these principles, and in what manner and direction improvements may be made.