LONDON'S GREAT POVERTY.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 3123, 25 February 1909, Page 7

LONDON'S GREAT POVERTY.

"The problem of poverty in London has seldom been rcore urgent than it is at this moment At this Christmas season 130,543 persons —or more than 27 out of every l.O'iO —are in receipt ef Poor-law relief. In ten years London has added 26,000 units to its pauper army. The total number has not be higher for 38 years; and we must go back to 1874 to find a higher ratio of paupers to population. We take these figures from the review of 'The Legal Poor of London' in the London "Times," an annual statement which always conveys the impression of being written with full, inside knowledge, and 'which often anticipates by many -months the report of the Local Government Board," says the "London Chronicle." "The figures are painfully arresting. They seem to warrant a very gloomy view of the state of things in London. Close consideration makes the facts look not less serious, but serious in other ways than might at first be supposed. When it is said that pauperism in London is more extensive, both absolutely and relatively to population, than it has been for a generation, t£e natural conclusion might seem to be nthat poverty and distress must be aianilarlY greater. Poverty, how--ever. is one thing, and pauperism is another. Largely, of course, "they coinicde, fend the increase of pauperism this year reflects a condition of distress. Largely, but not entirely; for the first fact which the analysis in the 'Times* brings out' is that the increase of pauperism in . confined to a few unions, whilst in more than half there has been a decrease. The Poplar Union aloi eis responsible for 41 per cent of the increase in East-end pauperism, and Islington for alinost all the increase in the North. The second fact to be noted is that where the increase is large a particular kind of lax administration exists. The social conditions of Popkr art pimilar to throin neighbouring unions. What u different is the Poor-law admini i ltion. Thp conclusion is irresistibl >, and it is supported by facts otherwise notori ius, that the administration is at faul>. The first problem of Poor-law reform is tn abolish the diversity of treatment which is favoured by the existence cf 31 different boards of guardians. The *pauper-fact< rl'es' must in some way be closed. Lax administration (especially in the matter of out relief) is not, however, the only form in which the rranufacture of paupers is carried on m London. Misguided philanthropy is another. The pauper army in Lordon is recruited from ail over the country; it is the Mecca of the 'work-shy,' because nowhere -else is the provision of shelters and the like so abundant, and in to other hunting ground are the profits of begging £0 ample. The persor who is most busily engaged in- the pauper-making trade of London is the indiscriminate alms giver. He it is who attracts the 'sturdy beggars,' and in bad times he attracts them more than in good."