Seven members of the School Board were placed on the Executive Committee as a kind of informal representation, but in 1899 this number had dwindled to three. (London School Board, Report of General Purposes Committee on Underfed Children, 1899, pp. v.-vi.) There was "no direct touch" between the two bodies, "except the accidental circumstance that Members of the Board might be on the Committee" of the Association. (_Ibid._, p. 6, evidence of Mr. T. A. Spalding.) Another committee appointed by the School Board in December, 1894, was just as emphatic as to the general inefficiency and want of uniformity. The work of giving charitable meals, they found, was still in the experimental stage, as was shown by the "extremely divergent views ... both as to the nature and extent of the distress ... and as to the efficiency of the methods employed in meeting it."[48] They were struck by "the apparent want of co-ordination between the various agencies which were dealing with distress in London" (_i.e._, the Poor Law, the Labour Bureaux established by the London Vestries, etc.). "The local committees in connection with the schools seem to have had no knowledge whatsoever of what was being done by these other bodies, except in the few cases where more or less permanent out-door relief was being given, and where the children presented attendance cards to be filled up by their teachers."[49] "Our work," remarked one witness, "is carried on without paying heed to what may be done under the Poor Law Authorities."[50] Relief was "often given without any connection with the managers or teachers of Public Elementary Schools." In one instance tickets for meals "were distributed without enquiry at the door of a Music Hall ... the proprietor of which had been one of the chief subscribers to the Fund."[51] In another case "tickets issued by an evening paper fund were sold over and over again by the people to whom they were given; sold in the streets and in the public-houses."[52] Even when the arrangements were nominally controlled by the Education Authorities the methods of selection were haphazard and the provision often totally inadequate. A number of witnesses gave evidence of this. "It was found that one child of a family was given fourteen tickets during the season, whilst another child of the same family had only one or two."[53] "It might have been well to have taken one or two children in hand for the purpose of observations," remarked the head-master of a Stepney school, "but I remember one of my instructions was that the same child was not to be given a meal too often."[54] In one school the number of children needing a dinner on any day was ascertained by a show of hands. Each child was then called out before the teacher and asked about its parents' circumstances.[55] In another case the teachers merely asked the children in the morning which of them would not get any dinner at home that day.[56] Of course there were seldom enough tickets