English Poor Law Policy by Sidney Webb; Beatrice WebbReview by: W. C.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 73, No. 4 (Apr., 1910), pp. 445-447Published by: Wiley for the Royal Statistical SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2340422 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 04:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Wiley and Royal Statistical Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the Royal Statistical Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.176 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:00:55 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1910.] Reviews of Statistical and Economic Book/s. 445

lucidity, skill, and knowledge, and he has produced a book which cannot safely be overlooked by those who are in the habit of pointing to a great amount of unearned income which might be available for division among the workinig classes; and it should be seriously considered by those who hold the more moderate view that there is much surplus income which can safely be taxed for the promotion of social reforms. A.L.B.

7.-English Poor Law policy. By Sidney and Beatrice Webb. 379 pp. Longmans, Green and Co., 1910. Price 7s. 6d. net.

This book is in the main (273 pages) a reprint of a report upon 'the policy for the relief of destitution from time to time laid down by the central authority between 1834 and the present day," which was prepared at the request of the Documents Committee of the Poor Law Commission, and presented to them in July, 1907. But, in addition, it criticises (45 pp.) the Report of the Royal Commission itself, "to see how far that bodv responded to the suggestion that it should formulate a definite body of principles upon which public assistance should proceed." The authors contend that Poor Law administration has departed widely from the principles of 1834, and that boards of guardians are in a state of hopeless bewilderment what the new principles are, to what classes of paupers they are to be applied, and what safeguards and qualifications they demand. " There is, in fact, to-day, a sort of ' no man's land' in Poor Law administration, in which the principles of 1834 have been de facto abandoned, without the principles of 1907 being consciously sub- stituted. Owing to this lack of central direction we find diversity without deliberation, indulgence without cutre, and relief without discipline." The principles of national uniformity, and of less eligibility, and the workhouse system have now, the authors assert, given place to the principles of curative treatment, of compulsion, and of universal provision. The change is alleged to have taken place unconsciously; "indeed, it is open to question whether suc- cessive presidents and particular officials, if suddenly cross-examined, might not reveal a complete unconsciousness of there being any new principles at all, and whether they might not profess to be still standing on the policy of 1834."

In order to support the allegation as to complete change of principles, the history of the Poor Law is carefully traced from 1834 onwards, in the first five chapters of the book, but we are not convinced by it that the main principles laid down by the Royal Commission of 1832 have ever been abandoned. What has taken place is not a change of principles, but a change in their application. The Poor Law indeed has gone through an evolutionary process during the last seventy-five years, as has happened in the case of other social and political questions, but the struggle has never been abandoned to maintain the old principles intact. Indeed, although the Minority Report would do away with them by breaking-up the Poor Law altogether, the Majority Report not only recognises their force, but to a large extent wishes to bring public opinion back to recognise the eternal truths which underlie them. Mr. and Mrs. Webb

VOL. LXXIII. PART IV. 2 i

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.176 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:00:55 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

446 Reviews of Statistical and Economic Books. [April,

know this perfectly well. For example, one of the main principles of 1834, which must be added to the other three which they mention, is that, while the Poor Law should relieve destitution only, charity should be able to deal with poverty and cure. So late as 1869 this principle was reiterated as follows: " The fundamental doctrine of the English Poor Laws, in which they differ from those of most other countries, is that relief is given, not as a matter of charitv, but of legal obligation; and to extend this legal obligation beyond the class to which it now applies-namely, the actually destitute-to a further and much larger class-namely, those in receipt of in- sufficient wages-would not only be to increase to an unlimited extent the present enormous expenditure, but to allow the belief in a legal claim to public money in every emergency to supplant, in a further portion of the population, the full recognition of the necessity for self-reliance and thrift. " It is clear, therefore, that the Poor Law authorities could not be allowed without further danger to extend their operations beyond those persons who are actually destitute, and for whom they are at present legally bound to provide. It would seem to follow that charitable organisations, whose claim could in no case be claimed as a right, would find their most appropriate sphere in assisting those who have some but insufficient means, and who, though on the verge of pauperism, are not actually paupers, leaving to the operation of the general law the provision for the totally destitute." (Minute of Poor Law Board, 1869.) One has only to read the reports of the Poor Law inspectors, which since 1886 have been published in the annual reports of the Local Government Board, to realise how much alive the old principles are. The so-called "principles of 1907 " are in fact the principles of Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Webb, however much they may try to disguise the fact. They have not been recognised officially, nor are they generally received as "going concerns." Indeed, the majority of the Commissioners argue for placing the care of underfed children and of the unemployed under the public assistance authorities. They want to preserve the Poor Law as a distinct entity, and see no necessity for breaking it up.

It is perfectly true, as we have already remarked, that the old principles are applied differently now than they were possibly intended to be applied by the Royal Commissioners of 1832. For example, the proposal to deal with that class of mental defectives to which the term " feeble-minded " is applied is merely an extension of our present lunacy laws. This class is quite a recent discovery, and the application of the deterrent principle to them is from the very nature of their misfortune impossible, the real ground of their claim for help being their mental condition and not their poverty. So, too, the casual pauper or vagrant can, without violating any of the old principles, be removed from the care of the Poor Law authorities to that of the police, as proposed by the Departmental Committee of 1904. The treatment of cases of infection by the sanitary authorities can be defended on the same grounds. The improved treatment of the sick, and of dependent children, does

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.176 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:00:55 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1910.] Reviews of Statistical and Economic Books, 447

not contravene any canon of Poor Law administration. But the endeavour to make Poor Law administration as uniform as possible for different classes of paupers, to make Poor Law relief as deterrent as possible, and to apply the workhouse test to the able-bodied at least, has since 1834 always been and still is the aim of all those who are not Fabians or Socialists. If the aged poor over 70 and the unemployed in large towns have been drawn from the control of the Poor Law, it has been owing to political expediency with the object of gaining popularity for one political party. The grant of free education was nothing but a gigantic political bribe, just as in the case of free old age pensions. Universal free feeding is the next move in the game which Mr. qnd Mrs. Sidney Webb are carrying on so merrily. We cannot but admire their energy and perseverance in the pursuit of curative treatment, compulsion, and universal provision. They might well adopt the motto of the French Revolutionist, " Sois mon frere ou je te tue." I would stuggest as a headline for every Fabian tract, " Cure aind Compulsion! " It does not seem to me that their latest book will obtain them many converts, except among a certain number of young dons and under- graduates, or among the impulsive class of philanthropists. It almost goes without saying that it is well and ably written, and undoubtedly an important contribution to the literature on the subject. W.C.

8.-Principles of Political Economy. By John Stuart Mill. Edited with an introduction by W. J. Ashley, M.A., M.Com 1013 + liii pp., cr. 8vo. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1909. Price 5s. net.

In the sixty years which have elapsed since 1848, when Mill's "Principles of Political Economy " was first published, economic inquiry and research have not stood still; but this special offsprinig of his fertile mind has not yet lost its place in the very foremost rank of systematic treatises in its own particular division of scientific study. As Professor Ashley says in his admirable Iltroduction to this new edition, "Mill's Principles will long continue to be read and will deserve to be read." The book represents indeed an " interesting phase in the intellectual history of the niineteenth century "; and Professor Ashley has skilfully contrived to say exactly what was necessary to convey to future readers an adequate account and estimate of Mill's "transitional" position. But its " merit," he adds with truth, is " more than historical."

We might have felt sure beforehand that Professor Ashley would bring to this fresh issue of an old and famous treatise the qualities associated with the new work he has himself accomplished in economic study. We have not been in anly measure disappointed. The careful collation made between the varying statements in the different issues that appeared during Mill's own lifetime is both interesting and instructive. Similarly, the " bibliographical appen- dix," dealing with certain passages where Mill's final exposition should be read to-day in the light of subsequent addition or correction, was happily conceived; and, in the somewhat narrow

2 i 2

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.176 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:00:55 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions