Crime -- England -- London -- History -- 19th century; London (England) -- Moral conditions; London (England) -- Social conditions
“It would undoubtedly conduce much to the utility of these
labour-yards if the guardians comprising the labour or out-door
relief committee would, as they now do in some unions, frequently
visit the yard, and thus by personal observation make themselves
acquainted with the conduct and characters of the paupers, with the
nature of the superintendence bestowed upon them, and with the manner
in which the work is performed. A channel of communication may thus
be formed between employers of labour when in want of hands and those
unemployed workmen who may by sheer necessity have been driven to
apply for and accept relief in this unpalatable form. The guardians
themselves, frequently large employers of labour, are for the most
part well acquainted with those who are compelled to apply for parish
work; and when they see a steady and willing worker in the yard will
naturally inquire into his antecedents. Where the result of these
inquiries is satisfactory, they will, it may be expected, gladly
avail themselves of the earliest opportunity of obtaining for such a
one employment in his previous occupation, or in any other which may
appear to be suited to his capacity. The personal influence and
supervision of individual guardians can scarcely be overrated; and
thus a bond of sympathy will gradually arise between the guardians
and the deserving poor, which, coupled with the enforcement of real
work, will, it may be hoped, prove not without an ultimate good
effect upon even those hardened idlers who have been hitherto too
often found in these yards the ringleaders in every species of
disturbance.”
The above-quoted is the suggestion of the Chairman of the Poor-law Board,
and well indeed would it be, for humanity’s sake, that it should be
regarded. As matters are at present arranged, the labour-system is
simply disgusting. Take Paddington stone-yard, for instance. Unless it
is altered since last year, the peculiar method of doing business there
adopted is this: a man gets an order for stone-breaking, the pay for
which is, say, eighteenpence a “yard.” At most workhouses, when a man is
put to this kind of labour he is paid by the bushel: and that is quite
fair, because a poor fellow unused to stone-breaking usually makes a sad
mess of it. He takes hammer in hand, and sets a lump of granite before
him with the idea of smashing it into fragments; but this requires
“knack,” that is to be acquired only by experience. The blows he deals
the stone will not crack it, and all that he succeeds in doing for the
first hour or two is to chip away the corners of one lump after another,
accumulating perhaps a hatful of chips and dust. By the end of the day,
however, he may have managed to break four bushels, and this at
eighteenpence a “yard” would be valued at sixpence, and he would be paid
accordingly.
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