transacted. The position of the Commissioners, invested with the central control, necessarily causes them to differ from the boards of guardians occasionally, with respect to questions arising in the administration of the law; but they declare their conviction of the generally trustworthy and considerate manner in which the boards of guardians discharge their functions, and of their readiness to devote to the transaction of the business, as much of their time as can be reasonably expected of the unpaid members of a body so constituted."

These extracts from the Commissioners' letter give so clear a description of the union system, that it has been preferred giving them verbatim, as it would be difficult to shorten or condense them, without weakening the effect. The relative duties and responsibilities of the central board, the boards of guardians, and the local officers, are distinctly stated; and it is necessary that the statement should have a place at this stage of our narrative, the Commission as originally constituted being about to be changed. Its members are, therefore, entitled to show how far it has fulfilled its mission, and the nature of the organisation which has been created. The statement is also necessary on another account, for everything that happened at any time to be wrong in the multifarious transactions of the several unions, whether in giving or in withholding relief, whether in the workhouse being over-strictly or understrictly managed, whether the officers were attentive or negligent, harsh or considerate, in the performance of their duties-all failures, excesses, or shortcomings of every kind, were attributed to the Commissioners, whom the public held responsible for every defect, without allowing them credit for any excellence. Against this assumed concentration of responsibility, and the sweeping imputations grounded upon it, the Commissioners' letter must be regarded as a protest.

Comparison of the

systems of

tration.

Under the old parochial system of administration, old and new defects and abuses were continually occurring, but adminis- they excited no attention beyond the immediate locality; whilst under the amended system, every defect or malversation is made known, is discussed and commented on, is circulated throughout the country by the press, and probably brought forward in parliament. This publicity no doubt ensures a more careful execution of the law; but it at the same time affords extraordinary facilities for attacking the Commissioners, for whatever happens to be unpopular in its administration; and it must be confessed that the means of attack thus provided, were not, during the latter years of the Commission, permitted to lie idle. The change now about being made in the Commission, and to which its unpopularity arising from these attacks no doubt contributed, will be described in the next chapter.

CHAPTER XVIII

A.D. 1847-52-53

The Commission is dissolved-Powers of the new Commissioners-Aged couples not to be separated-Visiting committees directed-Increase of expenditure and of the numbers relieved-Difficulty as regards outrelief-Exemption of stock-in-trade from rating-Resolutions of committee on law of settlement-Consolidated order-New Commission gazetted-Mr. Bodkin's Act-Mr. Buller's speech and Bill-Vagrancy : Mr. Buller's minute-Workhouse schools-Operation of settlement law-Parochial chargeability-Norwood and Tooting "farming" establishments-Cholera-Number of union officers and their salariesUsefulness of the workhouse-Rating of owners-Protection of poor children-Commissioners empowered to arbitrate-Audit of accounts -Vaccination-Education-Emigration-Improvement of workhouses -Expenditure on relief-Numbers relieved-Number of unions— Commissioners' orders and regulations--Laws now in force-Continuation of the Commission-Mr. Baines's speech on settlement-Its abolition, and the consolidation of the law, anticipated-Conclusion.

THE Commissioners appointed under the provisions of the Poor Law Amendment Act were prohibited from sitting in parliament, and had been unconnected with party politics. This separation from political influence would, it was believed, render their action more independent, and less liable to popular or local bias; but the result showed, that although these qualities might abound in a Commission so constituted, there were countervailing circumstances which rendered the policy of such an arrangement doubtful, the Commission being thereby deprived of the means of defending itself in the only place where defence would be effective. Public feeling and public prejudice, local or general, were represented and found supporters in parliament, where there was no Poor Law functionary to explain or to refute; and charges made there,

1847,

10 & 11

however exaggerated or groundless, spread through the country, and were received as undoubted facts, raising distrust and jealousy of the Commission, weakening its influence and impeding its action. It was denounced as being anomalous, tyrannical, irresponsible, and as exercising a power not recognised by the English constitution. This feeling prevailed within the House of Commons perhaps even more strongly than it did elsewhere, for every other department had its representative there, who might at once be questioned and called to account for whatever occurred; whereas the Poor Law Commissioners were beyond the reach of such questioning, and could only be called upon circuitously through the medium of the home secretary, or by the more tedious process of moving for papers.

These were the circumstances which at this time chiefly led to making a change in the Commission, and assimilating its constitution to that of the India Board, and other principal departments of government. The time for making the change was well chosen; all the more difficult and heavy work devolved upon the Commissioners by the Poor Law Amendment Act having been gotten through, the unions being formed, a system of relief organised, and the law brought into general operation. The Commission had been in existence sufficiently long, for gathering to itself all the unpopularity attendant upon changes which, under the authority of the new law, it had been the means of effecting throughout the country; so that by dissolving the Commission, both the cause and the object of unpopularity would be removed, and the law and the new executive would be left free from consequences which, as far as the original Commission was concerned, were perhaps unavoidable.

The above observations are offered by way of cap. 109. introduction to 10 & 11 Victoria, cap. 109, which

Vict.

empowers the crown to appoint from time to time, and during pleasure, such person or persons as her Majesty shall think fit, to be "Commissioners for administering the laws for the relief of the poor in England." The lord president of the council, the lord privy seal, the secretary of state for the home department, and the chancellor of the exchequer for the time being are, by virtue of their respective offices, to be Commissioners jointly with the person or persons so appointed; and they are to enter on their office, and have all the powers vested in them by the Act, on the day after the notice of the issue of the Commission shall be published in the London Gazette. This Commission, like the preceding, was only to continue for five years. "The Commissioners" are to submit annually to her Majesty a report of their proceedings, which is to be laid before parliament, and they are empowered to appoint two secretaries, one of whom and the president may sit in parliament.

The 10th section enacts, that on the day on which "the Commissioners" enter on their office, "all the powers and duties of the [existing] Poor Law Commissioners, with respect to the administration or control of the administration of relief to the poor throughout England, and all other powers and duties. now vested in them, shall be transferred to and vested in the Commissioners,' and shall be thenceforth exercised by them." Ireland is not named in this clause, a separate board having been created by 10 & 11 Victoria, cap. 90, for the administration of the Irish Poor Law, wholly distinct from that of England.1 'The Commissioners" are empowered, by order under

1 How far this separation was necessary or politic, may perhaps be questioned; but it was thought to be called for by the circumstances then existing, the "potato rot" having recommenced its ravages in the autumn preceding, and spread want and disease throughout Ireland, which a separate and resident Commission would, it was supposed, be better able to attend to and relieve.

VOL. II.-25