The Scotsman, Saturday, February 17, 1855

The Poor Law in the Highlands
"The following is an abstract of Sir John McNeill's report on the administration of the Poor-law in the parish of Glenelg, appended to the annual report of the Poor-Law Board:-

After mentioning the circumstances under which the evictions at Knoydart took place, and under which Mr E Ellice jun., made his complaints to the Board of Supervision, and to the Lord Advocate, Sir John states that Mr Ellice's being the only complaints which they had received, he determined to commence his inquiry by examining that gentleman.

In his communications to the Board of Supervision he had adduced in support of his charges against the Parochial Board only the case of Catherine McKinnon, and from his answers to questions it now appears that he then knew of no other case. The charges contained in those communications were therefore admittedly founded upon that single instance. Catherine McKinnon continued to inhabit the tent in which she had resided since August 1853, and she was not yet receiving parochial relief. Mr Ellice had made her the subject of much correspondence with the Inspector, the Lord Advocate, the Board of Supervision, the Home Office and the newspapers. Her case had also given rise to a lengthened correspondence between the Board of Supervision and the Parochial authorities, and had been the occasion of an elaborate report from that Board to the Secretary of state; the Sheriff-Substitute, accompanied by the Procurator-Fiscal and Sheriff-Clerk, had visited the spot, and was understood to have investigated the whole circumstances. But all these proceedings, extending over nearly 12 months, had produced no change. The case remained in all essential particulars in precisely the same state in September 1854 as it had been when Mr Ellice first took it up in November 1853. Catherine McKinnon continued now as in October 1853, when the case was first reported by the Inspector, to refuse relief. She refused now, as she did then, to enter any one of several houses that had been offered to her. Funds for her relief were now, as they were then, placed in the hands of a respectable person living near her, and she was informed that she could obtain relief from him whenever she pleased, but she had never expressed a wish for it. Money had repeatedly been offered to her on behalf of the Parochial Board by different persons, but she had invariably refused to accept it. She repudiated the idea of being considered a pauper, told the Sheriff's officer, who tried to induce her to accept 10s., which had been put into his hands by the parish for that purpose, that she had money of her own, and when that was done she knew where to get more. She still had her large flock of poultry, and possessed property, consisting of chests, barrels, and furniture, which, when lately removed, was found to amount to eight cart loads. The contents of the chests and barrels she refused to disclose. In short, the whole evidence, and all the circumstances fully confirm the accuracy of the Inspector's statements in his letter of the 23rd October, a copy of which was transmitted to Mr Ellice on the 25th November 1853, in the Board's answer to his letter of the 21st of that month. Such are the circumstances of the single case on which Mr Ellice admits that he founded his charges against the Parochial Board.

Margaret McKinnon, less obstinate than her sister, accepted in the first seven days of December 1853 the relief which she had previously rejected, and now only complains that the Parochial Board threatened to remove her from her present abode to a much better house, which they have fitted up for the accommodation of paupers at Arrair. She told me that she would as soon be thrown into Loch Nevis as go to that house at Arrair.

Although Mr Ellice at the time when he made his communication to the Board of Supervision, knew of no other specific case than that of Catherine McKinnon, it is probable that other cases might subsequently have come to his knowledge, I therefore put a question on that point. But, from his answer, it appeared that personally he had no knowledge of any case which he desired to bring to my notice with a view to its investigation.

It appeared, then, that Mr Ellice was unable to give me any information that could aid me in discovering even one case in which the parochial authorities had failed to perform their duty. In a letter which he had published in a newspaper, he had alleged that a man in Knoydart had become insane in consequences of the failure of the parochial authorities to afford him relief; but in answer to my inquiries he admitted that he was not acquainted with all the circumstances of the case, and could not say that he had reason to believe, or that any one had told him, that this man or his family had applied for relief previously to his becoming insane. It afterwards appeared from the evidence of the Inspector that no application by or on behalf of this man had been made to the Inspector, and that his attention had not been directed to the case till he had received an order from the Sheriff, when he offered 20s., but the wife of the insane man refused to accept it until she should have consulted her priest, fearing that the acceptance of parochial relief might prevent their getting passages to Canada. Next day she consulted the priest, and afterwards accepted the relief, she stated "that he [her husband] had been deranged ever since the people went to America, and that his insanity was caused by a fear that he would not get out himself".

Mr Ellice expressed his undoubting belief that the people of Knoydart are deterred from applying for parochial relief by an apprehension that it would not be given; but the question being put to him, he admitted that he did not know of any case in which application had been made to the parish, and relief refused. His impression was, that the people in Glenelg were in a state in which human beings ought not to be; but he said he could not give the name of any one of the persons to whom he referred as being in that condition. He had founded upon the case of Catherine McKinnon a general allegation that there was a system of starving aged and infirm persons into submission to be sent out of the parish. He now declined to maintain that opinion in respect to the individual case which he had selected as the foundation of the charge, or any other individual case, but adhered to the general inference which he had founded upon it. He asserted that there could be no doubt that the motive of the ejection of the people, who had been removed from Knoydart, was the apprehension that some or another they might be chargeable as paupers, that it was notorious in the parish, that everybody knew it; that he supposed there could be no other motive, and that all modern Highland evictions were to be attributed to that motive. Upon this point I examined five of the best informed persons in the parish, who were in daily communication with all classes of the inhabitants, and who resided at a considerable distance from each other. Mr Macrae, the minister of the parish at Kirkton; Mr Stavert, factor for Mr Baillie, at Arnisdale; Mr Macdonell, at Barrisdale, in the northern part of Knoydart; Mr Charles McLeod, at Scotas, in the southern part of that district; and Mr Cameron, the manager of the property at Inveree. None of them had ever heard such a motive imputed, supposed or surmised to be the motive, except Mr Macrae and he had heard of it only from Mr Ellice himself. None of them believed…They all attributed "the evictions" to a …to recover possession of land occupied by tenants who paid little or no rent, for the purpose of letting it to tenants who would pay the rent.

Mr Ellice expressed his belief that the removal of the people had been no pecuniary gain to the property, except in as far as it might relieve it of poor-rates. A statement furnished by Messrs Mackenzie and Baillie, W.S., the agents for the property, shows that comparing the present rent paid by the sheep-farmers, with that actually received from the ejected crofters, on the average of the five years 1847-52, the increase in annual rent consequent upon the change is L166.4s11d., equivalent to a capital sum of at least L3500. This fact may perhaps modify Mr Ellice's opinion as to the motive of the "evictions" in this particular case.

Mr Ellice has accused the Parochial Board of Glenelg of starving aged and infirm persons for the purpose of forcing them to go out of the parish and so relieve the parochial funds of the burden of their support. But the expulsion from the parish of persons who must speedily become chargeable wherever they might go, could not effect the purpose for which he imagined it was desired to expel them. The Parochial Board appeared, therefore, to have no conceivable motive for pursuing the course which Mr Ellice attributed to them. It appears then, that the charge of starving the aged and infirm poor for the purpose of getting rid of them is not founded upon any refusal of relief, for Mr Ellice had stated that he knew of no case of refusal,, but only upon an opinion that the parochial authorities ought to have come forward to offer relief to persons who had never applied for it, and that, under the distressing and exceptional circumstances attending the ejection from certain persons from Knoydart, relief ought to have been offered to all whether they applied for it or not. The Legislature has not required that relief shall be granted unless upon application, and nothing could well be conceived more completely subversive of every sound principle of Poor-law administration than that parochial authorities should tempt persons to accept relief who are not in such present need as to induce them to apply for it. I examined one man (McIsaak) whose case had very frequently been referred to as one of the most urgent and distressing, and I found that, when ejected, had, by his own account, a store of food sufficient for himself and his family for eight or nine months, and L8,16s in his pocket, besides a boat and nets valued at above L5. Would it not have been a proof of the mal-administration of the funds raised by assessment from persons, many of whom were probably poorer than McIsaak, had any part of these funds been expended upon him? Or is there a parish or union in the United Kingdom where a man who represented himself to be in such circumstances and applied for relief, would not have been refused?

Mr Ellice stated that during last winter the relief given to the paupers in the parish of Glenelg was something like one penny a-day, including house accommodation, clothing, food, and every other necessary; and that he believed it was very little more in the Highlands of Scotland generally. It appears, however, from a return to an order of the House of Commons, which could not be prepared in time to be presented before the close of the last session of Parliament, that, including the items above enumerated, the average amount of relief afforded to each of the 130 paupers who are upon the roll of that parish during the year ending 14th May 1854 was 1s.11d. per week.

It only remains to be stated, with reference to Mr Ellice's charges against the Parochial Board, that he has himself a seat at that board - that intimations of its meetings appear to have been regularly sent to him, and that he does not appear to have objected to any of the proceedings, or to have been present at any of the meetings of the Parochial Board. He has not, it is stated, given any assistance in the administration of the poor-laws in Glenelg, neither has he given the person who performed that duty a word of warning. The course pursued by Mr Ellice, in respect to the parochial authorities in Glenelg, appears to have been founded upon misapprehension of the principles and plan of the poor-laws in Scotland. He supposes - 1st, That the parochial authorities are responsible for such suffering as may be endured by persons who have not applied, and on whose behalf no application has been made to them for relief; 2nd, That if aged and infirm poor persons are compelled to go out of the parish in which they were born and have settlement, that parish escapes all future charge for their relief; and 3rd, That if the parochial authorities refuse relief to persons who are legally entitled to demand it, or give to such persons inadequate relief, a special inquiry by the Board of Supervision, or the intervention of the Lord Advocate, or even of the Secretary of State, is necessary to procure redress.

When I found that Mr Ellice was unable to furnish any evidence of the mal-administration with which he charged the Parochial Board, or any information by the means of which that evidence might be obtained, I had to determine some mode of prosecuting the inquiry without such assistance. It was desirable to ascertain the manner in which the Parochial Board conducted its business, and to inquire into the conduct and character of the inspector, but the most important subject of the investigation was the condition of the paupers, with a view to form, on safe grounds, an opinion as to the adequacy or inadequacy of the relief afforded them. It appeared to me that if I could ascertain the ordinary means and scale of subsistence of the independent labourers of the parish, who are not tenants of land, I could, by comparing them with those of the paupers, arrive at a sound conclusion as to the general adequacy or inadequacy of the provision made for the poor. If the relief given in any particular case or cases was inadequate, the statutory remedy afforded the means of obtaining redress. With these views, I prosecuted my investigation by separately examining persons of different classes at Kirkton, Corran and Camisbane in Glenelg; at Arrair, Sandaig, Scotas and Inveree in Knoydart, and also in parts of north Morar. There are four heritors in the parish, Lord Lovat, Mr Mcdonell of Glengary, Mr Ellice of Glenquioch and Mr Baillie of Glenelg. None of these gentlemen has ever personally attended a meeting of the Parochial Board. Neither Lord Lovat nor Mr Ellice has ever been represented at any meeting by a mandatory. Mr Mcdonell has been so represented only twice in the nine years that the Parochial Board has been in existence, Mr Baillie has generally been represented by his factor, Mr Stavert. The rate-payers having this year failed to meet on the day appointed for the election, there are now no elected members, and the duty of conducting the business of the Parochial Board has thus devolved upon the minister of the parish, assisted by Mr Stavert, when his other avocations permitted him to attend, and by one elder. Under his guidance, whatever may have been the defects in the constitution of the Board, the ordinary business appears to have been carried on in an orderly and systematic manner.

For the year ending 14th May 1854, the amount provided by the parish of Glenelg for the relief and management of the poor appears by the returns to have been L740, 0s. 9d. the number of paupers on the roll being 130, the amount of relief provided for them (L 633, 3s, 1d) is equal to L5, 1s 3d per annum to each; the average for all Scotland for the same year being L4, 2s 7½d. The whole amount provided by the parish is equal to 11.48% upon the actual rental, and to 7s 4¾d. per head of the present population. The average rate of assessment of the poor in Scotland, for the year ending 14th May 1854, is 6.2% on the annual value of real property, as returned to Parliament in 1843, and the average rate per head of the population is 4s.

During the time that I had an opportunity of observing Mr Ewen Campbell, the inspector, I discovered nothing that could lead me to doubt the justice of the honourable testimonies which I received to his personal character, and his conduct as inspector; but, on the contrary, I found additional reasons to rely on them.

The population of the parish of Glenelg, which according to the census returns was 2729 in 1841, had fallen to 2470 in 1851, and is now estimated at about 2000. It would be a fatal error to put the paupers in a position preferable to that of the labourers who maintain themselves and their families; but if outdoor paupers can live as well and in as good houses, without working, or with little work, as the labourer can by hard work, the position of the pauper will be preferred to that of the labourer and almost every labourer, especially in the Highlands, will desire to be a pauper. The maximum of safe legal relief to the poor, therefore, in any parish, where there is no other than out-door relief, is something less than would place them on a level with the independent labourer. To ascertain, then, the proper measure of relief in Glenelg, it was necessary first to find out the ordinary condition and scale of subsistence of the working classes. The average wages earned by a labourer do not amount to more than 4s a week throughout the year. The average gains of the fisherman can hardly exceed those of the labourer -viz., 4s a week, or L10, 8s per annum - in addition to which both have a similar supply of potatoes.

The means of subsistence of the paupers consist of what is provided by the parish, and what they can contribute by their own exertions. According to the official return to the order of the House of Commons, what is provided by the parish, including house accommodation, clothing and all other necessaries which the parish provides, comes to a fraction more than 1s.11d. per week for each person upon the roll. The relief provided to each individual, including children, is 18.73, or about 1s. 6¾d., on the average per week. But besides what they receive from the parish, almost all of them cultivate potatoes, getting on the average nearly 11½ cwts of potatoes for each individual.

On the comparative condition of the paupers and labourers, I examined persons of all classes - cottars, crofters, a mason, an elder, shopkeepers - the minister of the parish, the parish schoolmaster; all the resident gentlemen whom I had an opportunity of examining; and the inspector of the poor. With only one exception, a cottar and fisherman at Camisbane, whose statements are contradictory, and not much to be relied on, I found no one prepared to assert that the condition of the pauper was inferior to that of a large proportion of the cottars; and the majority of all classes were of opinion that the regularity and certainty of the pauper's allowance, and the precarious nature of the labourer's employment, made the condition of the former, on the whole, preferable.

The rapid increase of pauperism in nine years, from 1 in 70 of the population to 1 in 15 in the whole parish, and to 1 in 10 in Knoydart, while the proportion in Ireland is reduced to 1 in 91, would alone have been strong presumptive evidence that both in its amount and in its form, the relief afforded to the poor is too attractive to the labourer.

In the report which I made to the Board upon the operation of the poor-law in Caithness, I had occasion to point out a similar progressive deterioration in the moral character of the population in that county arising from the same cause; and I suggested the erection of poor-houses as the legitimate and most effectual remedy. The same evils in Glenelg appear to me to require the same remedy. The question is no longer one of expenditure - it involves the moral character and ultimate welfare of the people themselves. But unless a combination can be formed with some other parish or parishes, Glenelg cannot erect a poor-house; for the statute requires a population of 5000, and that of Glenelg is only 2000. If that parish had the means of giving in-door instead of out-door relief, it is probable that one third of the paupers on the roll, or even a still larger proportion, rather than accept relief in a poor-house, would relinquish it altogether, and find means of maintaining themselves without assistance from the parish. But if an arrangement cannot be made for giving poor-house accommodation to the parish, the, I think, it would be desirable that the Parochial Board should immediately carry out the plan they contemplated at Arrair, for the erection of houses in which the paupers of Knoydart can be collected together under proper superintendence, in lodgings prepared for them; that the Parochial Board should require the paupers of that district, unless in particular cases under special circumstances, to remove to those lodgings; and that they should strike off the roll all who refuse to remove, except in cases where the objection is founded upon the state of health of the pauper."