Great Britain. Royal Commission on Poor Laws and Relief of Distress; Poor -- Great Britain; Poor laws -- Great Britain
[779] Local Government Board to St. German's Union, December 1898;
_Local Government Chronicle_, 24th December 1898, p. 1192.
_I._--NON-RESIDENTS
There is no change to record in 1871 in the expressed policy of
preventing relief to paupers not resident within the union. Such relief
(given in order to avoid the expense and hardship of removal) continued
in many cases, but was repeatedly blamed by the inspectors.
"Non-resident relief is given in almost all the unions ... sixteen per
cent of the outdoor paupers of Glendale Union were non-resident."[780]
In 1878 the Central Authority suggested that such relief "might be
almost entirely discontinued."[780] There has been no explicit
abrogation of this policy down to the present day; even in face of
representations that it is "harsh and totally out of keeping with the
spirit of the times."[781] But from 1871 onwards we have the force of
the maxim weakened by the growth of whole classes of cases which the
guardians are allowed, and even encouraged, to send to places outside
the union, and maintain there. We need do no more than allude to the
boarded-out children. Another growing class is that of paupers who are
placed in certified schools or homes, either by way merely of
boarding-school (frequently recommended as a method of disposing of
Roman Catholic children); or for residence in any industrial or
reformatory school; or (irrespective of age) for maintenance in an
institution for special treatment (blind, deaf and dumb, crippled,
epileptic, idiot, etc.); or merely in an asylum for the aged and
infirm;[782] or for curative treatment in a hospital, convalescent home,
seaside home, or sanatorium.[783] Even able-bodied aged paupers may, as
the Poplar Guardians were informed in 1896, be boarded out in country
families, under the guise of non-resident relief. The Central Authority
has not objected to the transfer of workhouse inmates, provided these do
not actively protest, to country workhouses, there to be maintained as
non-resident paupers.[784] In one case, indeed, the Central Authority
allowed a union to abolish its workhouse altogether (retaining only a
casual ward), and approved "arrangements for the boarding-out of the
indoor poor in the workhouses of other unions for a period not exceeding
five years."[785] It is, therefore, not easy to determine how much is
left of the policy of preventing non-resident relief as such.
[780] Third Annual Report, 1873-4, p. 78.
[781] Memorandum relating to the Administration of Out-relief,
February 1878, in Seventh Annual Report, 1877-8, p. 224. "The
suggestion that non-resident relief should be absolutely abolished
is one in which the president is quite disposed to concur, with
perhaps, some reservation regarding existing cases" (Local
Government Board to Chairman of Central Poor Law Conference, 12th
May 1877, in Seventh Annual Report, 1877-8, p. 56).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account