(3) This Act shall be read as one with the principal Act, and may be cited as the Old Age Pensions Act, 1911; and this Act and the principal Act may be cited together as the Old Age Pensions Acts, 1908 and 1911.

CHAPTER V

THE UNEMPLOYED

[On February 17, 1909, a formidable series of subjects for social legislation was supplied by the publication of the Report of a Poor Law Commission which had been appointed in December, 1995, with Lord George Hamilton as chairman. The Commission contained a number of high authorities on the subjects with which it dealt, including various Poor Law officials, Mr. C. S. Loch of the Charity Organisation Society, Professor Smart of Glasgow, and three well-known women Miss Octavia Hill, Mrs. Bosanquet, and Mrs. Sidney Webb. It held over 200 meetings, heard 1300 witnesses, sent out special investigators, and visited many unions and institutions in the three kingdoms; and its evidence and other material filled forty volumes. The Report volume was the largest ever issued by a British Royal Commission; and the mere summary of its contents occupied three pages of the London Times. The very brief synopsis that appeared in the "Annual Register" is given below (Extract 36).

On May 19, 1909, Mr. Pickersgill, a Liberal Member of Parliament, called attention to the Minority Report of the Poor Law Commission and moved a resolution declaring the urgency of "steps for the decasualisation of casual labour and for the absorption of the surplus labour thereby thrown out of employment; also to regularise the demand for labour, to develop trade union insurance against the risks of unemployment, and to establish training colonies and detention colonies." The motion was seconded by Mr. Percy Alden and supported by Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, the Labour leader.

Then Mr. Winston Churchill, President of the Board of Trade, took the opportunity to set forth a Government scheme of labour exchanges and unemployment insurance (Extract 37). The scheme was welcomed as of far-reaching importance by Mr. F. E. Smith on behalf of the Opposition (Extract 38), and by Mr. Arthur Henderson on behalf of the Labour party (Extract 39). Mr. Pickersgill's motion was withdrawn, and the Labour Exchanges Bill was introduced the next day by Mr. Churchill, the insurance plan being deferred until another session.

The second reading of the Labour Exchanges Bill on June 16, 1909, gave rise to an interesting debate. Sir F. Banbury, Unionist member for London, doubted the utility of the exchanges and argued that the loans to unemployed men to enable them to take work at a distance would lead merely to idle travelling. Mr. Pointer, a new Labour member, referred to the successful working of the system in Berlin, urged that the age of leaving school should be raised and scientific and technical instruction given, and declared that working overtime robbed unemployed men of work. He suggested that employers should contribute towards the travelling expenses of men who found employment through the exchanges. Mr. Chiozza Money, the Liberal, urged that the railways should carry such men at a reduced rate. Mr. Renwick, Unionist member from Newcastle-on-Tyne, condemned the Bill, declaring that it would degrade labour, and the exchanges would be a sort of hiring fair. Mr. Roberts, a Labourite from Norwich, warned the House that while the Bill would assist the organisation of labour, unemployment would continue until collective superseded individual ownership. Mr. Bonar Law, the prominent Unionist, while approving the Bill in principle, thought there was too much centralisation, and the measure was too much of a blank cheque — the Government were introducing their Bill first and preparing their plan afterwards; if eloquent speeches alone would cure unemployment, the Government would do it; otherwise they must wait for some other Government.

Second reading was agreed to on June 16 and third reading on July 29. The progress of the Bill through the House of Lords (July 30-August 5) was uneventful; and the royal assent was registered on September 20. The Labour Exchange Act, 1909, is inserted as Extract 40.

For the provisions of the Natural Insurance Act of 1911 affecting unemployment, see infra, Chapter X.]

Extract 36

REPORT OF POOR LAW COMMISSION, 1909

(Résumé from the "Annual Register")

The Report of the Poor Law Commission, published on February 17, 1909, contained a majority and a minority report. The former, signed with some reservations by fourteen of the eighteen Commissioners, was largely statistical and historical, dealing with the history of Poor Law administration before and since 1835, the causes of and remedies for unemployment, and the reorganisation of charity; and it made 239 recommendations as to reform.

Briefly, the majority of the Commissioners held that the Local Government Board should have more direction and initiative in assisting local authorities in relief; and that these latter should be entirely reorganised. Boards of Guardians should be abolished and replaced by a "Public Assistance Authority" in each county or county borough, with Public Assistance Committees under it with delegated powers, one Committee (in the first instance) in each existing union area. The poor rate would be a county or county borough rate. The Public Assistance Authority would be a committee of the County or County Borough Council, half being appointed from outside it, and consisting of persons experienced in public assistance" (the recommendations avoided the terms

1 Annual Register, 1909, pp. 9 sqq.

"poor" and "charity"), and one-third retiring each year. Women were to be eligible under either head. The Public Assistance Committees were to be appointed by the authority, and to include representatives of the local Urban and Rural District Councils, and of the Local Voluntary Aid Committees of which the Report contemplated the formation. Of these Public Assistance Committees at least one-third should ordinarily be women, and the members should be experienced in "public assistance." One-third should retire annually, but should be re-eligible. For London the general scheme was modified as follows: half of that half of the Public Assistance Authority which was to consist of non-members of the County Council "skilled in public assistance" was to be appointed by the Local Government Board, so as to secure representation of the medical and legal professions, employers and workmen, hospitals and charities, etc.; and the Public Assistance Committees would contain some borough councillors. The poor rate, moreover, was to be made uniform throughout London.

The Public Assistance Committees in each area were to take their powers from the Authority; they were to inquire into cases for assistance, administer aid in conjunction with the Voluntary Aid Committees, and supervise the public charitable institutions within their areas. These would be of seven kinds, the old workhouses being abolished: institutions for (1) children, (2) the aged and infirm, (3) the sick, (4) able-bodied men, (5) able-bodied women, (6) vagrants, and (7) the feeble-minded and epileptic. In each subordinate area, alongside the Public Assistance and Voluntary Aid Committees, there was to be a Labour Exchange and a Stateaided organisation of unemployment insurance. The unemployed would be dealt with by the Public Assistance Authority; but those who required detention and discipline would be transferred to Labour Colonies under the Home Department.

The Commission, while admitting many exceptions, found the work of Boards of Guardians generally unsatisfactory, and concluded that general workhouses, the consequence of the existing