"Of whom we trust the two latter will be the least numerous classes. It appears to us that both the requisite classification and the requisite superintendence may be better obtained in separate buildings than under a single roof."[34] The Commissioners were insistent that the treatment measured out to each class should differ according to its requirements, and "each class might thus receive an appropriate treatment; _the old might enjoy their indulgences_ without torment from the boisterous; the children be educated; and the able-bodied subjected to such courses of labour and discipline as will repel the indolent and vicious."[35] The need for separate buildings, under entirely different kinds of officers, with different qualifications, at different rates of payments--in contradistinction to one large building under a single officer--is emphasised again and again at different parts of the Report.[36] It was, indeed, largely in order to provide these specialised institutions that the Commissioners recommended the formation of unions, it being made a cardinal principle that the Central Authority should "assign" to the various existing workhouses thus coming under one board of guardians "separate classes of poor."[37] [34] p. 306 of Report of 1834. [35] p. 307 of Report of 1834. [36] _See_ pp. 305, 306, 307, 313-314 of Report of 1834. [37] p. 314 of Report of 1834. It is interesting to notice that, apart from this cardinal principle of classification by separate and specialised buildings, practically the only recommendations relating to the organisation of the workhouse, which are to be found in the Report, relate either to the character of the employment to be provided in the buildings set aside for the able-bodied--which, as we have seen, was expressly to be of a normal productive character, free from repellent characteristics--or to the enactment of a maximum diet (and no minimum). "The Commissioners should be empowered to fix a _maximum_ of the consumption per head within the workhouses, leaving to the local officers the liberty of reducing it below the maximum if they can safely do so."[38] [38] p. 298 of Report of 1834. _I.--Emigration_ Without laying much stress upon emigration, the Report recommends that any vestry should be empowered to pay for it out of the poor rate, in the case of persons (apparently whether paupers or not) having settlements in the parish and willing to emigrate.[39] [39] p. 357 of Report of 1834. _J.--Relief on Loan_ The Commissioners recommended "that under regulations to be framed... parishes be empowered to treat any relief afforded to the able-bodied, or to their families, and any expenditure in the workhouses, or otherwise incurred on their account, as a loan," to be legally recoverable. It is to be noted that this proposal is expressly limited to the "able-bodied or to their families." No definition, as usual, is given of the term able-bodied.[40]