130. Hansard, March 27 and 29, 1905, Vol. 143, pp. 1307-9, 1543.
131. Ibid., April 18, 1905, Vol. 145, p. 531.
132. Ibid., March 2, 1906, Vol. 152, p. 1394.
133. Ibid., April 18, 1905, Vol. 145, p. 554. The balance of opinion was at this date in favour of the latter. Sir John Gorst thought that where the parents could not pay for the meals "reference should be made to the Poor Law authority, and the natural consequences of the receipt of public relief would follow." (Ibid., July 9, 1903, Vol. 125, p. 197.) In the Bill introduced by Mr. Claude Hay in March, 1905, provision was made for payment of the cost of meals by the Guardians, but any parent receiving such relief from the Guardians might apply to a court of summary jurisdiction and the court, "if satisfied that the parent's ... inability to pay is temporary and arises from no fault of his own," might make an order that he should not be disfranchised. (Elementary Education (Feeding of Children) Bill, 1905, clause 3.)
134. For a description of the working of this order see the Report of the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, 1909, 8vo. edition, Vol. III., pp. 160-162.
135. Relief (School Children) Order, 1905, Article V. (in 35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 322).
136. Ibid., Article II., sec. 2.
137. Ibid., Article VI. Whether the amount was recovered or not the parent became a pauper, and was disfranchised.
138. Ibid., Article VII.
139. "The whole Order," declared Mr. Wyatt, the Director of Elementary Education at Manchester, "was a most perplexing thing. Very early in the year there came down to Manchester a Poor Law Inspector who said that the construction of the Order was that the children of widows or deserted women should not come under the Order. That swept away a great many of those we had been feeding." (Report of Select Committee on Education (Provision of Meals) Bills (England and Scotland), 1906, Q. 1208.) Miss Margaret Frere was of opinion that the Order would be a dead letter in that it ruled out the two most difficult classes, one being widows and deserted wives. (Report of Inter-Departmental Committee on Medical Inspection and Feeding, 1905, Vol. II., Q. 483.)
140. Circular of Local Government Board accompanying Relief (School Children) Order, in 35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 320.
141. Circular issued by the Board of Education to the Local Education Authorities re Relief (School Children) Order, April 28, 1905.
142. The order "has been so far practically a dead letter in this district" [the counties of Bedford, Hertford, Huntingdon, etc.]. (35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 452.) Such seems to have been the case also in Yorkshire and the northern counties, in Wales, in Essex and in Surrey, for we find no mention of the Order in the reports of the Inspectors for these districts.
143. Minutes of the London County Council, July 11, 1905, p. 297. The Council objected to the introduction of a dual authority in every district, which would cause delay and possibly friction; the absence of any provision for uniformity of rules in the different districts; and the radical error of allowing the cost to fall on the local authorities instead of on Government funds, or at least on the rates of London as a whole. The risk of fathers being disfranchised as a result of meals being supplied by the Guardians to their children without their knowledge, would militate against the usefulness of the scheme (ibid.). As a matter of fact very few cases were relieved in London under the Order. (Hansard, July 31, 1906, Vol. 162, p. 680.) In two unions, Fulham and Wandsworth, where the Guardians offered to assist, the Council allowed lists to be sent from the schools, but the great majority of these children were reported by the Relieving Officers not to be underfed. (Report of Joint Committee on Underfed Children for 1905-6, p. 4.)
144. At Bristol out of 129 applications from the Local Education Authority, the Guardians felt justified in giving relief in 12 cases only. (35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 480.) At Chorlton, relief was given in 219 cases out of 1,295 applications; at Salford in 175 out of 1,086. (Ibid., p. 504.) At Stoke-on-Trent, out of 72 cases reported 4 were relieved, and at Ecclesall Bierlow 51 cases were reduced after careful investigation to one. (Ibid., pp. 488, 520.) At Kettering, on the other hand, practically all the cases referred to the Guardians were relieved. (Report of Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, 1909, Appendix, Vol. I., Q. 6443.) This, however, was exceptional.
145. At Birmingham it was found that many parents "were earning over 30s. a week, and in one case the parent was in constant employment with an average rate of £3 17s. 6d. a week." (35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 495.) At Bolton, some of the parents were receiving from £2 to £3 a week. (Ibid., p. 506.)
146. In the Bolton Union, in cases where the father's income was considered sufficient to provide meals without assistance, "the children were specially watched and reported upon by the Cross Visitor each fortnight, until the Guardians were satisfied that the parents were carrying out their responsibility in this respect.... The Relieving Officer visits the home at meal time, or in the evening, to see what provision is made for feeding the children." (35th Report of Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 503.) At Birmingham the head teachers were of opinion that the children were being better looked after by their parents than formerly owing to the way in which the Order was being carried out. (Ibid., p. 495.)
147. Bradford City Council Proceedings, September 26, 1905.
148. At the centres provided by the Guardians "the children were kept outside the doors until all was ready, and when they were allowed to enter they came in without any semblance of order, to tables without cloths, without seats." (Bradford and its Children: How They are Fed, by Councillor J. H. Palin, 1908, pp. 6-7.) Later the Guardians distributed the children among various little eating-houses in the town, where the food was better, though the conditions of serving were not much improved. (Ibid.)
149. Hansard, February 28, 1906, Vol. 152, p. 1129; Bradford City Council Proceedings, September 26, 1905; see also the local newspapers about this time. The prosecutions were apparently confined to those cases where the underfeeding of the children was due to neglect on the part of the parents. The charge fixed by the Guardians was, however, very high, 3d. per meal. Up to March 1, 1906, action had been taken in the County Court against 51 men and orders for payment obtained in each case. (A short account of the working of the Relief (School Children) Order, issued by the Bradford Poor Law Union, 1906; Report of Select Committee on Education (Provision of Meals) Bills (England and Scotland), 1906, Qs. 1702-05.) In other unions there seems to have been little or no attempt to recover the cost. At Birmingham, for instance, it was reported, "the process of recovery laid down by the Local Government Board was farcical in character and was dropped." (Report of Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, 1909, Appendix, Vol. IV., Q. 43626, par. 37.)
150. Extracts from the Annual Reports of the Bradford Education Committee for the four years ended March 31, 1907, 1908, 1909 and 1910 in respect to the working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, p. 3.
151. At Birmingham the Free Dinner Society, after an existence of thirty years, ceased its operations when the Order came into force. (Report of the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, 1909, Appendix, Vol. I., Q. 8525.) "There was at first," declared Mr. Jenner Fust, a Local Government Board Inspector, "much misapprehension among the public as to the scope of the Order, the prevalent idea being that all school children requiring it would now be supplied with free meals at the public expense, and that there was no further occasion for voluntary efforts." (35th Report of the Local Government Board, 1905-6, p. 506.)
152. Hansard, December 6, 1906, vol. 166, p. 1284.
153. The Bill was introduced by a private member, Mr. W. T. Wilson. The Government decided to make the matter an open question with their followers. (Ibid., February 22 and March 2, 1906, vol. 152, pp. 525, 1399.)
154. For the debates on the Bill see Hansard, March 2, December 6, 7, 13, 19, 20 and 21, 1906 (vol. 152, pp. 1390-1448; vol. 166, pp. 1273-1292, 1315-1465; vol. 167, pp. 722-780, 1473-1482, 1629-1670, 1865-1881).
155. See, for instance, the discussions at a conference of representatives of Charity Organisation Societies held in 1906. (Charity Organisation Review, July, 1906, pp. 30 et seq.)
156. Mr. Harold Cox, Hansard, March 2, 1906, vol. 152, pp. 1412, 1417.
157. Report of the Select Committee on the Education (Provision of Meals) Bills (England and Scotland), 1906, evidence of Mr. Mill, Chairman of Edinburgh School Board, Q. 4194.
158. Ibid., evidence of Mr. Scott, Head Teacher of Wood Close School, Bethnal Green, Q. 2641. Cf. evidence of Dr. Kerr (Q. 2984), Miss Horn (Qs. 1321-2), and Mr. Ferguson (Q. 2739).
159. Ibid., Qs. 1287-1290.
160. Hansard, March 2, 1906, Vol. 152, p. 1441.
161. Ibid., December 6, 1906, Vol. 166, p. 1280.
162. Ibid., p. 1285.
163. Ibid. See also the speeches of Mr. Jowett (ibid., March 2, 1906, Vol. 152, p. 1412), Mr. Claude Hay (ibid., December 6, 1906, Vol. 166, p. 1288) and the Earl of Crewe (ibid., December 19, 1906, Vol. 167, p. 1478). An amendment to substitute the Poor Law Guardians for the Local Education Authority as the authority for the administration of the Act was defeated by an overwhelming majority, the voting being 290 to 36. (Ibid., December 6, 1906, Vol. 166, pp. 1274-1288.) The Local Government Board did not, in fact, desire to have the duty imposed on them. (Mr. John Burns, ibid., p. 1285.)
164. An amendment to limit the provision of meals to underfed children only was defeated by 230 votes to 39. Mr. Lough declared the amendment would strike at the root of one of the objects of the Bill. (Ibid., December 7, 1906, Vol. 166, pp. 1339-40, 1350.)
165. Ibid., December 20, 1906, Vol. 167, p. 1637.
166. 6 Edward VII., c. 57.
167. Ibid., clause 1.
168. Ibid., clause 2. The Select Committee to which the Bill had been referred, while of opinion "that the local education authority ought to undertake the administration rather than the Boards of Guardians," nevertheless recommended that it should be the duty of the Guardians to recover the cost from neglectful parents. (Report of Select Committee on the Education (Provision of Meals) Bills (England and Scotland), 1906, pp. viii., x.) They accordingly inserted a provision to this effect (see the Education (Provision of Meals) Bill as amended by the Select Committee, No. 331 of 1906, clause 2). This was amended in the committee stage in the House of Commons. (Hansard, December 7, 1906, Vol. 166, pp. 1439-1444.
169. 6 Edward VII., c. 57, clause 4.
170. Ibid., clause 3.
171. Ibid., clause 6.
172. Hansard, December 20, 1906, Vol. 167, pp. 1662-1670.
173. Ibid., December 21, 1906, pp. 1865-1881.
174. 8 Edward VII., c. 63 (December 21, 1908). A Bill was introduced by the Government in 1907, but was withdrawn. (Hansard, March 20, 1907, Vol. 171, pp. 880-883.) For an account of the provision made in Scotland see Appendix II.
175. Report of Select Committee on the Education (Provision of Meals) Bills (England and Scotland), 1906, p. vi.
176. Aston Manor was the first town to apply for authority to levy a rate. Bradford, Manchester, and other towns soon followed. During the year ended March 31, 1908, 40 authorities were authorised to levy a rate. During the two following years the number was increased to 85 and 96 respectively. (Report on the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act up to March 31, 1909, p. 8; Report of the Board of Education for 1908-9, p. 123; ditto for 1909-10, p. 62.)
177. Appendix to Minutes of the Hull Education Committee, October 22, 1909.
178. Report of the Scarborough Amicable Society for 1910, pp. 5, 8.
179. "Feeding the Children," by H. Beswick, in the Clarion, October 11, 1912.
180. First Annual Report of the Leicester Children's Aid Association, 1907-8, p. 3.
181. For a description of the methods adopted, see post, pp. 96-7. A somewhat similar system is in force at Chesterfield, where the arrangements for feeding are made by the Civic Guild, the expense being borne out of their funds. The Education Committee is represented on the General Council and Executive Committee of the Guild in a general sense, not in connection with feeding alone. Cases of children requiring food are reported by the Attendance Officers, and are fed at once by the Guild, investigation being made afterwards. If help is found necessary the whole family is adequately relieved. Arrangements are usually made for the children to be fed at eating-houses. The number of children so dealt with is very small.
182. Hansard, April 23, 1909, 5th Series, Vol. 3, p. 1797.
183. Education (Administrative Provisions) Bill, December 8, 1908; February 19, 1909; April 14, 1910; February 19, 1912; April 15, 1913.
184. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, pp. 320-322, 329.
185. The most important of these are Leicester, Sunderland, and Barnsley.
186. See Report on the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act up to March 31, 1909, p. 30, and (for London) p. 24; ditto for the year ended March 31, 1910, p. 20; Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1910, p. 309; ditto for 1911, p. 332. The voluntary contributions are understated in the figures for 1908-9, and possibly throughout. The returns for 1908-9, for instance, do not include Liverpool, where the whole cost was defrayed by voluntary contributions, and no financial details were supplied to the Board.
The discrepancy in the total for 1911-12 is due to the fact that the figures in the several columns are not given exactly, but to the nearest £.
187. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, pp. 322-24, 330.
188. This does not include children fed at Day Industrial Schools, Open Air Schools or, with one or two exceptions, Special Schools for Mentally or Physically Defective Children.
189. This number represents the average attendance at the ordinary Elementary Schools, not the total number on the rolls. (Statistics of Public Education in England and Wales, 1911-12, Part I., pp. 27, 333.)
190. In 1908-9, by £1,645; in 1909-10, by £2,370; in 1910-11, by £1,163, and in 1911-12, by £374. (Report on the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act up to March 31, 1909, p. 26; Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1910, p. 304; ditto for 1911, p. 317.)
191. Hansard, April 23, 1909, 5th Series, Vol. 3, pp. 1862-1863. A similar complaint was received from Hartlepool. (Ibid.)
192. See Minutes of Kingston-on-Hull Provision of Meals Sub-Committee, March 24, 1911, Appendix, p. 16. The abortive Bills introduced in 1908 and the following years by Labour members contained a clause that the limitation of the rate should be abolished.
193. "School Feeding," by Wm. Leach, in the Crusade, November, 1911 (Vol. 2, p. 192).
194. For a fuller account of the arrangements made for providing food at the Day Industrial Schools and the Special Schools see post, pp. 117-122.
195. Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act, 1899 (62 and 63 Vict., c. 32, sec. 1 (1)).
196. As at Birkenhead, Bradford, Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham, Stoke, West Ham.
197. Report of School Medical Officer for Crewe, 1911, p. 23.
198. Report of the School Medical Officer for Bournemouth for 1911, pp. 5-7.
199. "When a system of medical inspection of school children such as already exists under several Local Education Authorities has been established, the School Canteen Committee, so far as its operations are concerned with underfed, ill-nourished or destitute children, should work in intimate connection with the school medical officer." (Circular issued by the Board of Education, January 1, 1907, in Report on the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act up to March 31, 1909, p. 44.) "It is obviously desirable that any arrangements made by a Local Education Authority under the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906 ... should be co-ordinated, as far as possible, with the arrangements for medical inspection under the Act of 1907." (Board of Education, Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools in England, 1908, p. ii.) The general supervision of the administration of the Act was placed in the hands of the Board's Medical Department.
200. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1910, p. 254.
201. Ibid. for 1911, p. 276. This course is strongly urged by the School Medical Officer for Portsmouth. "All children, however selected, either by the physical or poverty test, should be examined by the School Medical Officer. This in many areas would involve a good deal of extra work on many medical men who find their time already fully occupied. Yet if any work is worth doing it is worth doing well, and here it is that the value of the School Medical Officer comes in, by culling and recording facts relating to the personal condition of the child, as well as the home conditions and surroundings of his or her life." ("The Importance of a Well-advised and Comprehensive Scheme in the Selection of Children ... under the Education (Provision of Meals) Act," by Victor J. Blake, in Rearing an Imperial Race, edited by C. E. Hecht, 1913, pp. 22-23.)
202. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, p. 275.
203. Brighton Education Committee, Report of Canteen Joint Branch Sub-Committee, July 17, 1907. There were, of course, also the cases of "necessitous" children who did not appear on medical grounds to be suffering from malnutrition, but who, from the economic circumstances of the parents, were unable to obtain sufficient food. Children to whom the provision of a mid-day meal would be a convenience, and whose parents were able and willing to pay the cost, should also be provided for. (Ibid.)
204. We have not been able to ascertain exactly what happens to these children on the "watching" list. In 1910 the School Medical Officer reports that they "are examined at intervals by the school doctor, and their progress is noted, the [Canteen] Committee taking such action as is recommended. Enquiries are also carried out by the school nurse, under the supervision of the school doctor, as to the nature of the meals given at home in these cases." (Report on the Medical Inspection of School Children in Brighton for 1910, p. 134.) These home visits by the school nurse are no longer paid.
205. In 1911, out of 1,050 children who received free meals, 54 were not examined, 550 were recommended by the school doctor on medical grounds, 446 were fed solely on economic grounds. (Ibid. for 1911, p. 119.) In 1912, out of 1,070 children fed, 69 were not examined, 422 were recommended on medical and 579 on economic grounds. (Ibid. for 1912, p. 122.)
206. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, p. 277.
207. Report of School Medical Officer for Lancaster for 1911, p. 26.
208. Report on the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, up to March 31, 1909, pp. 12-13.
209. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, p. 273.
210. Report of West Ham Education Committee for the year ending March 31, 1910, p. 51. This is the procedure now in force.
212. We were informed by the head teacher of an infants' department that she did not insist on a note being sent more than two or three times a week.
213. Report of Erith Education Committee for the three years ending March 31, 1911.
214. The Public Feeding of Elementary School Children, by Phyllis D. Winder, 1913, p. 27.
216. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1910, pp. 107-8; ditto for 1911, pp. 104-5. In several of the few towns where Care Committees have been appointed, they take no part in the work of feeding the children, their functions being confined to the "following up" of medical cases and perhaps the finding of employment for the children when they leave school.
217. At Southend-on-Sea enquiry is made by the Civic Guild into many of the cases. (Report of the School Medical Officer for Southend-on-Sea for 1911, p. 54.) At Bradford the Canteen Committee communicates to the Guild of Help the names of all the new cases which are put on the feeding list. The members of the Guild thereupon visit any cases in which other help besides the meals is needed.
218. As at Birkenhead, Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Salford, Sheffield, Stoke, etc. At Birkenhead an attendance officer has been specially appointed for this purpose. At Bradford a special constable has been told off to make enquiries in difficult cases.
219. Thus, at Birkenhead, where the Canteen Committee meets very seldom, the cases are decided by the Chairman.
220. The Public Feeding of Elementary School Children, by Phyllis D. Winder, 1913, p. 26.
221. Report of Bootle School Canteen Committee, 1911-12, p. 3.
222. Report of the Manchester Education Committee, 1910-11, p. 221.
223. Report of the Bootle School Canteen Committee for 1910-11, p. 22. At Birkenhead, and probably in other towns, the percentage of children fed in the Church of England schools is very much higher than in the Council schools, whilst the Roman Catholic schools feed a larger number still than the Church schools. This is doubtless due partly to the character of the buildings, the non-provided schools being generally very much inferior, and the better-off children being consequently attracted to the Council schools; partly, of course, also to the fact that the Roman Catholic population is chiefly Irish and very poor.
224. The Public Feeding of Elementary School Children, by Phyllis D. Winder, 1913, pp. 27, 29, 59, 62.
225. Leicester Pioneer, October 29, 1910.
226. Quarterly Report of the Leicester Children's Aid Association, July 1 to September 30, 1910.
227. The Public Feeding of Elementary School Children, by Phyllis D. Winder, 1913, p. 29.
228. Report of the School Medical Officer for Leicester for 1912, p. 36.
230. Thus it was found at a school in Bethnal Green that, "in spite of the supervision of a most efficient Care Committee," the change from a porridge breakfast to a meat pie dinner doubled the number of children attending. ("The Feeding of Necessitous Children. A Symposium. I., Experience in S. W. Bethnal Green," by A. W. Chute, in Oxford House Magazine, January, 1909, p. 37.)
231. At West Ham, for instance, where all the children on the feeding list receive both breakfast and dinner, the number of breakfasts given during the year 1911-12 was 247,233, and the number of dinners 273,894; the attendance at breakfast was thus only ninety per cent. of the attendance at dinner. (Report of the West Ham Education Committee for the year ended March 31, 1912, pp. 175-77.)
233. Bradford Education Committee, Report on a Course of Meals given to Necessitous Children from April to July, 1907, p. 7.
234. Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, pp. 322-324.
235. Roughly about half the children fed receive both meals (Bradford Education Committee, Return as to the Working of the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, for the year ended March 31, 1913.)
236. Enquiries made by the head teachers showed that in the aggregate 295 children received no mid-day meal or an insufficient meal. Since, presumably, these enquiries were made by the method of questioning the children, no particular value can be attached to the actual figures; the school attendance officers enquired into fifty-four of the cases taken at random and found that all but two showed undoubted poverty in the home. (Report of Bootle School Canteen Committee, 1910-11, pp. 10-11.)
238. London County Council, Report of the Medical Officer (Education) to Sub-Committee on Underfed Children, 1909. See also "School Feeding," by Dr. John Lambert, in Medical Examination of Schools and Scholars, edited by T. N. Kelynack, M.D., 1910, pp. 240-242.