The Slippery Slope

Front matter

|London Stereoscopic Co., 106 Regent St

|

| [Frontispiece.

Introduction

INTRODUCTION

These papers were selected for publication by Mr Bailward shortly before the War; therefore in giving them to the public his friends feel that they are fulfilling his wishes. It may seem to some readers that as the Parliamentary Bills which are the subject of his keen criticism have most of them become Acts, it is of no use to cry over spilt milk. It must, however, be remembered that because an ill-advised measure becomes law it is not thereby endued with wisdom; and if, as has happened in the case of many of these Acts, criticism has unfortunately been proved by experience to be well-founded, it may act as a warning. It may not only prevent further mischief, but show the path of amendment.

Two things, at least, stand out prominently in these papers. The first is the remarkable lucidity of the writer's style. Mr Bailward was a master of English, and he was therefore able to say what he wished with ease and humour. Hence, though he deals with subjects which are too often considered uninteresting by the general public, they are handled with such lightness and even brilliancy of touch that there is hardly a dull line in the book.

The author is careful to point out that his writings are not intended to convert Socialists who have made up their minds and who have a settled policy; but to warn those who may still be hesitating on the edge of the "slippery slope." There must be many men and women who have neither time, inclination, nor opportunity for studying the difficult problems of Social Science; but who listen readily to those who recommend the downhill path, partly because it appears to be the easier and follows the line of least resistance, but partly also because they do not want to be thought retrograde or out-of-date: they do not care to be treated with the pitying contempt of which the reformer who professes to disbelieve in the Laws of Political Economy has so large a stock-in-trade. To these such a paper as the one entitled "Social Study on Large Maps" would show clearly that the problems of to-day were those of hundreds and even thousands of years ago; that the remedies applied to social ills in ancient Greece and Rome failed, as they will do to-day, if the weakness and strength of human nature are alike disregarded by those who desire them.

Another characteristic of the author is his extreme fairness to his opponents. He invariably states the communistic view in the strongest possible way and presents the arguments against his own position with scrupulous care. He seems at times indeed to be forgetful or unconscious of the fact that he has already demolished them by invincible commonsense and the pitiless logic of facts.

The conclusions at which Mr Bailward arrives are based on a profound study of human nature, and a firm belief in the teaching of history and especially in the History of the Poor Law. It is a fashion of the present day to relegate the teaching and experience of the past, when they happen to be inconvenient, to a kind of "dump," regardless of the fact that the lessons were learnt at painful cost by our forefathers and that they burnt their fingers severely in the process. "Dumps," as recent experience shows, have a disagreeable habit of exploding with sad results to individuals—the explosion of this social "dump" would mean disaster to the nation.

Mr Bailward was something of a prophet in the true meaning of the word, but not one who prophesied the smooth things to which the uninstructed public so readily listens. Such a paper as the "Psychology of Pauperism" is a short but careful study of what the consequences may be of pandering to the weaker side of human nature. There is an easy-going temper abroad which coolly takes it for granted that although certain results undoubtedly followed certain foolish deeds in past times, they are not likely to follow similar acts of folly now. If the question is asked, "why not?" the answer usually amounts to this: human nature has materially changed for the better. For this pleasant and comfortable assumption there is absolutely no warrant ; on the contrary, the history of the past six years gives ample proof that undisciplined human nature in every class of life can be as idle, self-indulgent and cruel as it ever was.

The History of the English Poor Law may be dull, though there may be two opinions as to that. Modern Schools of Economics may relegate it to the rubbish heap—Professors may bury their learned heads in the sand and encourage their pupils to study the principles of Bolshevism, as the only things worth studying at the moment. But in spite of the contempt of the Schools, Poor Law History will repeat itself unless its lessons are heeded; and the warnings of unpopular but fearless prophets are even now being fulfilled. Must the procession of disastrous failures in Social experiment stretch out to the crack of doom?

All this does not mean that no reforms are needed. Mr Bailward was a reformer in the best sense. But reforms, if they are to be vital and beneficent and not engines of destruction, must be based on principles which have stood the test of practical application and have been the foundations and bulwarks of national greatness and prosperity in the past.

As a nation we have already travelled far down the "slippery slope," and it sometimes seems to anxious watchers as if nothing could stop a fatal plunge into a gloomy abyss of national bankruptcy both of character and purse. Some among us, however, may hope to live long enough to see the inevitable reaction, the proverbial swing of the pendulum, the painful climb up. They may even experience the sinister satisfaction of unheeded prophets who can say: "We told you so."

Sophia Lonsdale.

Biographical Note

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

It is not proposed to write a lengthy biographical notice of the Author of the following pages, but it is perhaps desirable to give a sufficient sketch of his career to indicate the authority and experience which lie behind his words.

William Amias Bailward was born in the Somersetshire village of Horsington in June 1852, and was educated at Rugby School and Balliol College, Oxford. He underwent a full legal training, which was of much value to him in after-life, but after being called to the Bar and having gone once or twice on circuit, he decided to abandon the Law as a profession and spent some years in foreign travel, visiting Australia, New Zealand, India, and other British colonies and possessions.

On his return finally to England he settled down to live in London with a sister who became at that time the guiding influence in his life.

Soon afterwards (in 1887) he first became interested in the work of the Charity Organisation Society and their Honorary Secretary in Bethnal Green, the district which remained the principal field of his labours until his death in March 1918.

He was for the greater part of that time a Guardian, and for some years Chairman of the Board of Guardians of that Union, and considering the great differences which must have existed between his views and those of many of his colleagues and of the electorate it is a remarkable tribute to his personality and moderation that he should have been constantly elected. It was greatly due, no doubt, to his influence that Poor Law administration in Bethnal Green has formed an effective contrast with that of other East End Unions.

To the casual acquaintance he was known generally as a witty and agreeable companion and a good sportsman, in the best sense of the word, and only a few intimate friends were really cognisant of the great amount of time, labour, and research which he devoted to Poor Law and Charity Organisation work.

His chief interest, even in sport, always consisted in giving entertainment to his many friends and the younger members of his own family.

It is an indication of the confidence which was reposed in his judgment by all those with whom he was brought into contact, that at the time of his death he was a member of thirty-five Committees of various kinds, and had it not been for his extreme dislike of any kind of notoriety he might well have taken a leading part in political and civic life.

Amongst his papers was found a slip written shortly before his death, with the following quotation from Montaigne:—

"Je veux … que la mort me trouve plantant mes choux, mais nonchalant d'elle, et encore plus de mon jardin imparfait;"

and these essays are a small part of the fruit of that unfinished garden.

His last illness was probably due to his assiduous attendance at the Bethnal Green Appeal Tribunal during the winter of 1916-17 for long hours and in all weathers.

A. C. B.

1 Princes Mansions, Victoria Street, S.W. 1.

Preface

PREFACE

The accompanying volume contains the substance of various articles and papers covering a period of twenty-five years, during which the author has been engaged in poor law and charitable administration in London. Two or three of these have already appeared in pamphlet form. They have been written at various times and upon various occasions, and have no special connection, except that they deal with different aspects of the same subject. They therefore contain some repetitions and some references that have been rendered obsolete by subsequent legislation. But the author ventures to republish them much as they were written, in the hope that the fact that they are based upon the experience of twenty-five years of practical work in a poor district may commend them to the consideration of students of the most difficult problem of local government. They are not addressed to socialists, who at least have a definite social theory, but to those who appear to be halting between two opinions. The author is indebted to the Editor of the "Times" for permission to republish the criticism of the Minority Report.

W. A. B.

Social Study on Large Maps

SOCIAL STUDY ON LARGE MAPS

The late Lord Salisbury once advised those who wish to study foreign politics to do so upon large maps. The same advice may be given to those who wish to study social problems, and especially the problem of poverty ; for there is, perhaps, no department of social economy in which the field of observation is so wide and the phenomena are so persistent, and in which the sequence of cause and effect appears to be so inexorable. We are often warned against the danger of historical comparisons, and of course such a danger exists. There must always be controversy as to the interpretation of history, especially of that which is more remote. It is not suggested, therefore, that the comparisons should be pressed too closely ; but at least there is sufficient evidence to show that, even in the remoter periods of history, much the same things were being said and done in regard to the problem of poverty as are being said and done at the present time, and that certain principles and tendencies have established themselves beyond the reach of controversy.

The writer does not pretend to do more than to give the barest outlines of some of the best known phenomena in the social history of the past which appear to illustrate three of these principles and tendencies. Readers must form their own conclusions as to whether or no they are relevant to the social questions of the day. His purpose will have been accomplished if he induces any one to examine the question more closely for himself.

The first point to be noted is that great measures of unrestricted State relief have had, from the earliest times, a monotonously disastrous effect upon the character of those who have received it. The Theoric Fund in Athens provided for an allowance of two oboli a day at first, and later three oboli to citizens attending public festivals and assemblies. Mr Grote defends this in principle "as the natural corollary of the religious idea associated with the festival" (cap. lxxv.); but he adds that "it was pushed to an abusive and mischievous excess in later times," and undoubtedly it ultimately degenerated into a great system of State relief to the poorer citizens. A writer of the times says that "Pericles by his Theoric Fund made his fellow-citizens babblers, idle and greedy, prodigal and dissolute." Aristotle points out its impotence to relieve poverty, "the demagogues distributed the surplus revenues to the poor, who received them all at the same time, and then they were in want again. It was only like pouring money through a sieve … the problem was to contrive how plenty and not poverty should become permanent" (Loch, "Charity and Social Life," p. 33, Ar. Pol. 1320a). The Annona Civica in Rome was equally disastrous to character, and equally futile as a measure for the relief of poverty. Initiated by Gracchus, B.C. 121, it at first ordained that corn should be sold to citizens at a cheap price. Later, Clodius, as a political move, made the distribution free. The distribution was originally quarterly, then it became monthly, and finally it was daily. It was estimated that at first only one-eighth of the citizens participated, and that in the time of Julius Caesar the proportion was three-quarters. Caesar reduced the numbers, but they eventually rose again; "in the age which preceded the fall of the republic it was estimated that only two thousand citizens were possessed of an independent substance" (Gibbon, cap. xxxi.). Cicero, speaking prophetically at the time when the distributions were first made free, says that the measure was "welcomed by the people to whom it assured an ample food-supply without obligation to work; but it was looked askance at by thoughtful people, who saw that its result could only be to empty the Treasury, and to make the people live in idleness" (Cic. pro Sext. c. 43), and his prophecy was fulfilled to the letter. The Annona which was levied upon conquered nations came to an end when Rome was fighting for her life against foreign nations; but it had continued over many centuries, and we may quote Gibbon's description of the social conditions existing under the successors of Constantine: "For the convenience of the lazy plebeians, the monthly distributions of corn were converted into a daily allowance of bread. A great number of ovens were constructed and maintained at the public expense; and at the appointed hour each citizen who was furnished with a ticket ascended the flight of steps which had been assigned to his peculiar quarter or division, and received, either as a gift or at a very low price, a loaf of bread of the weight of three pounds for the use of his family," and what was the result? "From those stately palaces (the baths of Caracalla and Diocletian) issued a swarm of dirty and ragged plebeians, who loitered away whole days in the street or forum to hear news and hold disputes, who dissipated in extravagant gaming the miserable pittance of their wives and children, and spent the hours of the night in obscure taverns and brothels in the indulgence of gross and vulgar sensuality." With regard to their amusements, "The Roman people still considered the circus as their home, their temple, and the seat of the Republic. The impatient people rushed at the dawn of day to secure their places, and there were many who passed a sleepless and anxious night in the adjoining porticoes. From morning to evening, careless of sun or rain, the spectators, who sometimes numbered four hundred thousand, remained in eager attention, their eyes fixed on the horses and charioteers, their minds agitated with hope and fear for the colours they espoused, and the happiness of Rome appeared to hang on the event of a race." The theatres were monopolised by "licentious farce, effeminate music, and splendid pageantry." When, in time of scarcity, all strangers were banished from the city, "singers and dancers were exempted from a law which was strictly enforced against the professors of the liberal arts." Such was the effect of public benevolences in Greece and Rome, and we have had much analogous experience in later times. It is hardly necessary to labour the point. Recent writers, such as Mr and Mrs Sidney Webb, are quite as emphatic in their condemnation of the evil of a "hypertrophied Poor Law," as were Cicero and other writers in their condemnation of similar largesse 2000 years ago.

Another point that is suggested by a study of the "large map" is that unrestricted public relief invariably falls eventually by its own weight, and that there is no ultimate refuge for the poor man in distress except in the unconstrained love and charity of his fellow-men. The "principle of acceleration," which, as Dr Chalmers tells us, is inherent in all poor laws, and of which more will be said hereafter, invariably causes the demand to outrun the supply with the result of an empty treasury as well as an emasculated people. In Athens the Theoric Fund "was carried to abusive and mischievous excess in later times." In Rome the Annona grew from cheap corn to free corn, from free corn only to free corn, bacon, and oil, and was extended from a section of the population to practically all the poorer classes. And then the crash came. When Athens fell upon evil days the Theoric Fund had to be diverted to military purposes. When the same happened to Rome, and Sicily and Carthage were lost to the Empire, the treasury was exhausted, and the unhappy citizens, destitute of all power of self-maintenance, were thrown back upon voluntary charity and the Church. During the siege by Alaric, "the daily allowance of bread was reduced to one half, to one third, to nothing, and the price of corn continued to rise. The poorer citizens solicited the precarious charity of the rich, and for a while the public misery was alleviated by the humanity of the Empress Læta, who consecrated her princely revenue to the use of the indigent" (Gibbon, cap. xxxi.). The distributions of corn were finally discontinued after Theodoric, and the suffering of the people, enervated by centuries of pauperism, is a matter of history.

From this point of view we stand perhaps in a worse position even than Rome itself. The Roman benevolences were levied upon conquered nations ; our own are levied upon the industry of the people themselves, and it is hardly possible to doubt that if our expenditure continues to increase at its present rate we shall some day find ourselves face to face with an empty treasury and a ruined industry. Lord Morley, speaking at Newcastle some years ago, put it thus: "Depend upon it," he said, "that the burden of taxation, however spread, however disguised, falls in the long run most heavily upon the shoulders of the working man," and a hard-headed, north-country audience greeted the remark with cheers. At the present time there is a sense of uneasiness which is quite unprecedented amongst quiet and law-abiding people who busy themselves little with politics, but who subscribe most of the capital required for industrial enterprise. Consols are at a lower level than for many generations, and home securities are heavily depreciated all round. The investor stands aloof from enterprises in which British workmen are employed, because he may at any time lose his money owing to the conditions of the labour market and the growth of taxation, and prefers to invest his savings in foreign enterprises which certainly give no direct employment to the British workman, and so home industries by which our people live are in danger of being gradually atrophied. We may recall Montesquieu's definition of socialism, "aujourd'hui le pillage demain la famine."

Another feature of unrestricted public benevolence which has at all times been equally persistent and equally baneful is to be found in its use for political purposes. The Theoric Fund was used largely for the purpose of obtaining the popular suffrages. The throne, and sometimes the lives, of the Roman Emperors depended upon the munificence of their largesse. We find that even voluntary charity was similarly tainted in quite early times, that of the Roman patron towards his client being often a political expedient devoid of any sense of moral obligation. "The people," says Cicero, "have only one way of doing us a good turn and recognising our services to them, and that is to follow us in a crowd when we go to demand place and honour. It is fair that they whose hopes are centred in us, should do something for us. The least they can do is to give us their votes" (Cic. Pro Murem., c. 34). Political charity is not unknown in these days, but its effect must always be insignificant in comparison with that of public relief which draws upon the public exchequer, and which calls for no personal sacrifice from those who administer it, but which, on the contrary, paves the way to "place and honour." Similarly, in modern times, the path to political eminence and to the gratification of personal ambitions by public benevolence lies, as a rule, over the backs of the poor. We have seen the disastrous process at work in many countries and we see it in our own, for, unhappily, the leaders of both political parties make use of "social reform," in the sense of great measures of public relief, for party purposes without any disguise. A leading statesman on one side advocates a particular measure on the ground that it offers "ninepence for fourpence." Just as this is written, a speech by a leader on the other side is reported in the "Times," in which, under the heading "How to win the next Election," social reform is put forward as a principal means of securing the votes of the electorate ("Times," 29th July 1912). The leaders have, in fact, to submit to the dictation of party agents throughout the country, who send urgent messages that this or that measure of "social reform" is essential for immediate party purposes, with a cynical disregard of ulterior consequences.

There are several other questions of poor relief which it is interesting to study "on a large map," because we see that many practical problems which are now before the public were equally pressing two thousand years ago. For instance, we are now much concerned with the question of feeding of school children, and we are alarmed at a falling birth-rate. Augustus, "in order to increase the free population," initiated a system of subsidy to poor families in proportion to the number of their children, and the system was continued and extended until the exhaustion of the treasury in the later Empire. We may in this connection recall Pitt's abortive poor law which had the same object. Again, we have recently adopted the principle of a minimum wage. Diocletian endeavoured to arrive at the same result by fixing a maximum price for food. One result of this was that at the least appearance of scarcity all strangers and even Italians were expelled from Rome. The experiment was an unqualified failure.

Again, we now hear on every side denunciations of the selfish luxury of the idle rich, but they are as nothing to similar denunciations by the fathers of the Church. "You sit down to a sumptuous feast," says St Chrysostom, "when Christ has not the barest necessaries ! You drink the wine of Thasos when He has not a glass of water to quench His thirst." "What will you say to your Judge?" says St Basil, "who clothe your walls with splendour and leave your fellow-men naked, who let your corn rot in your barns and give none of it to the poor. If an unhappy man begs of you, you say that you have nought to give him. But the very hand with which you repulse him glitters with a priceless jewel and gives the lie to your words. How many poor debtors might be set free, how many houses rebuilt with that ring? Your wardrobe would suffice to clothe a whole people and you send the poor naked away" (Chastel, "Etudes Historiques sur l'influence de la Charité," p. 195-6: Chrys., Horn. 48; Basil, Horn, in Div., c. 4). St Jerome says, "All riches are the result of iniquity. Every rich man is unjust or the heir of an unjust man." Truly there is nothing new under the sun.

Or if we regard the matter from another point of view we find that one side of human nature has changed but little. "Socrates the historian mentions a Jew who, pretending to embrace Christianity, went in succession to the various communities both heretical and orthodox to ask to be baptised, and received from all valuable presents until Paul, Bishop of the Novatians, discovered the fraud, it is said, by a miracle" (Soc. Hist. Eccl., Bk. vii. c. 17). We hear, too, in the Early Church of "spiteful and slanderous widows who instead of calling down the blessing of God on their Bishop made it their business to find out what others had received and then complained of the injustice of the distribution of alms" (Apost. Const, iii. 12-14). We even find that an organisation of charity was initiated by the Church, doubtless as the result of those and similar abuses. Each Bishop was directed to attach to himself a steward for the administration of the funds of his diocese. The deacons and subdeacons who were called "the hand, the mouth, and the soul of the Bishops" were his agents for the distribution of alms. They kept a register of the families that they had to relieve regularly. The deacons' duties were "to write down the names on a special register, to which the name of 'case paper' was given later, and to enter the name, the sex, the profession, and position of each applicant and to obtain the most circumstantial and exact information" (Chastel, p. 99; Cyprian, Ep. 2,7 and Ep. 38; Acts vi. 3-1 1).

Looking then at the "large map" we find that we have advanced surprisingly little in regard to these matters since the beginning of the Christian era. It is, however, rather remarkable that a considerable section of the Anglican Church at the present time appears inclined to look to bureaucracy and compulsion as a solution of the problem of poverty. We may judge from the words of St Chrysostom, how great a departure this is from the tenets of the Early Church. "You cannot," he says, "like St Peter, cure the cripple: give at least your gold. I do not force you to do it if you do not wish to. I use no compulsion but I conjure you to give at least a part to the poor. God might have constrained us to almsgiving: He has preferred to obtain it from our free will so that there may be room for reward" (Chrys., Horn. 90). St Irenseus, comparing the almsgiving of the Jews with that of the Christian Church, says that the "one is the offering of slaves, the other that of free men." (Iren., de Hares, iv. 34).

We have also the records over many centuries of attempts repeated again and again, to make work for the unemployed. In ancient times they degenerated into a system of slavery (Chastel 314, Wallon Hist., t. iv., p. 3, c. 4 and 5). In more recent times we have had some 230 years' experience of the old poor law which was intended to "set the poor on work," and we have had the experience of the national workshops in Paris in 1793 and 1848. Finally we have had seven years' experience of the Unemployed Workmen Act, which was passed as a measure of social reform in the teeth of the warnings of those who had studied these questions most closely. And what is the result? The Act has recently been condemned in the most unqualified terms by the Reports of the Commission, which are unanimous at least in this. Yet, in spite of this condemnation, already some three years old, it still goes on. So difficult is it in these matters to retrace a false step.

It has already been said that readers must judge for themselves as to the relevance of this past history to the history of the present day. But there are many ominous coincidences which must at least awaken grave anxiety in the minds of those who love their country. The public charge for relief has about quadrupled itself in the last twenty-five years, yet there is no sign that it is improving the condition of the people or satisfying their demands. On the contrary, a fierce appetite for relief appears to have sprung up amongst them similar to that which prevailed in Rome under the Empire. Labour unrest, strike succeeding strike with constant scenes of violence, the repeated repudiation of contracts solemnly entered into, recalls the turbulence of the pauperised Romans. We have even in these days citizens who "loiter away whole days in the town to hear news and hold disputes." We have citizens who "dissipate in extravagant gaming the miserable pittances of their wives and children." We have leaders of democracy who, like Clodius, clamour more and more for doles and free maintenance for all; theatrical display and pageantry of all kinds multiply daily; games and amusements monopolise the public mind; huge crowds look on in eager attention at athletic contests, "their minds agitated with hope and fear for the colours they espouse." "The happiness of the country often appears to hang upon the issue of a single match."