The regulations for the support of paupers operate beneficially on industry. Every proprietor of an estate, every community of a town or village has unquestionably the most correct knowledge of the bodily condition, of the moral conduct, of the expertness, of the capability to earn a livelihood in whole or in part, and of the pecuniary circumstances of the needy persons under their jurisdiction, whom they are bound to support, as well as of the circumstances of their relatives. The pauper knows that aid must always be given when necessary, and he applies to the proper authority for it, when not duly afforded; while he is, on the other hand, deterred from making exorbitant claims by his situation being so thoroughly known in every respect, and from ungrounded demands not being complied with. In general, therefore, neither the party called upon for assistance, nor that requiring it, inclines to let the authority interpose, but an amicable arrangement usually takes place between them, according to existing circumstances. The pauper must perform what service or work he can for those who assist him, or for himself, towards contributing to his own support as far as in his power; while those rendering assistance can seek only in themselves the means to do so, of course in the least expensive and most suitable manner. The paupers are employed at various kinds of work and service, accordingly as such is wanted and as they are able to perform it, and this as well for their supporters, privately, as in the public workhouses.
It is, in general, to be observed that the right of settlement of individuals is established in the following manner:—
If any person acquires the right of citizenship in a town, or a possession (house or lying-ground) in the country, or if he is permitted by the local authority to form a regular domicile by becoming a householder, he then is considered as an expressly accepted member of the community, and the obligation to support him, when reduced to want, immediately commences. So soon, therefore, as any person shows an intention to settle, or to become a householder, in a place, it is the business of the community, or of those interested, to ascertain, through the medium of the proper local authority, whether or not the emigrant possesses sufficient means to maintain himself there. Should this not be the case, and he is evidently unable to earn a livelihood, then must the support of the individual (or family) be borne by the community where he has previously dwelt, and it is not advisable to permit the change of domicile. Thence is the rule justified, that upon any person being regularly received as member of a community, with the express consent of its magistracy, that community becomes bound to render him support, when his situation requires it. Minors belong to the community in which their parents were settled, even after the death of these. With regard to other inhabitants, only that town or village community is bound to maintain a pauper where he last contributed to its public burthens.
A person who is of age, and has resided three succeeding years in a place (for instance, as servant,) acquires by that the right of settlement, but which he again loses by leaving the place for one year. Privileged corporations, that possess a particular poor-fund, or raise among themselves, pursuant to their laws, the means to provide for their needy members, are specially bound to maintain them.
In conformity with the rules before stated, must also the wives, widows, and destitute children of paupers be supported by the communities or corporations, or the owners of the estates.
Paupers for whom communities, corporations, proprietors of estates, or relatives are not bound to provide, according to the foregoing rules, or when these are unable to do so, have to be maintained in provincial poor and workhouses. These are established at the expense of government, and supported by contributions from the whole province.
We are inclined to suspect that the practice corresponds with Mr. Abercrombie’s account, and the general law with Mr. Gibsone’s, and that the pauper possesses a legal right to assistance, though that right is seldom enforced, because the impotent are voluntarily provided for, and the able-bodied would probably be sent to a penal workhouse. It is probable indeed that the law itself is vague as respects the relief of the able-bodied. The difficulty in framing a poor-law, of either expressly admitting or expressly rejecting their claim, is such that almost all who have legislated on the subject have left their legal right undecided. Mr. Gibsone’s statement, that no person able-bodied or capable of earning a livelihood has a legal claim for support, is inconsistent with his general account of the law, unless we change or into and.