The following classification of the casuals admitted into the wards of a rural union, unnamed, is published by the Poor Law Commission:—[12]
| Occupations. | 1905 | 1906 | 1907 | |||
| Navvies | 552 | 772 | 613 | |||
| General labourers | 404 | 485 | 489 | |||
| Carters | 62 | 56 | 61 | |||
| Carpenters | 42 | 6 | 37 | |||
| Masons | 38 | 42 | 48 | |||
| Grooms | 37 | 40 | 60 | |||
| Seamen | 34 | 28 | 48 | |||
| Fitters | 24 | — | 20 | |||
| Shoemakers | 23 | 24 | 36 | |||
| Firemen | 15 | 21 | 31 | |||
| Tailors | 13 | 16 | 11 | |||
| Gardeners | 12 | 12 | 8 | |||
| Miners | 12 | — | — | |||
| Bakers | 4 | 13 | 13 | |||
| clerks | 11 | 8 | 38 | |||
| Ironmoulders | 11 | 5 | 16 | |||
| Blacksmiths | 9 | — | 13 | |||
| Other occupations | 142 | 57 | 69 | |||
| Professional tramps | 79 | 25 | 66 | |||
| Total | 1,512 | 1,610 | 1,673 | |||
Of 450 men admitted into the casual wards of the Skipton-in-Craven workhouse during the period September 1 to November 12, 1904, 50 were aged and infirm, while 250 described themselves as general labourers, and 150 as tradesmen.
The classification of the latter was as follows:—
| Tailors | 30 |
| Joiners | 15 |
| Mechanics | 12 |
| Bricklayers | 12 |
| Painters | 12 |
| Masons | 12 |
| Spinners | 12 |
| Weavers | 12 |
| Butchers | 9 |
| Colliers | 8 |
| Printers | 8 |
| Shoemakers | 8 |
It must be granted, of course, that every highway wanderer is not a loafer, and that the workhouse casual ward itself offers a rude hospitality to many a decent wayfarer who is deserving of a better fate, though a good deal of misapprehension exists on this subject. There is no means of learning the percentage of bona-fide work-seekers amongst that section of the vagrant population which fights shy of poor relief, but when one enters the casual ward it is possible at once to divide the sheep from the goats. Those who theorise upon the basis of intuition, and much more those who confuse the voting of other people's money with Christian charity, are apt to conclude that, as a matter of course, the casuals "in a lump" are not "bad," but only unfortunate, and deserve all such relief as is afforded them. It would be futile to deny to the most habitual of vagrants the power to impress even the case-hardened listener by fiction which is a good deal stranger than truth, by doubtful emotions and still more doubtful morals. Let appeal be made, however, to the trained observation of the Poor Law clerk and the weather-beaten soul of the workhouse master, and a different story will be learned. Some years ago I questioned all the Poor Law authorities of Yorkshire on the subject; half the answers placed the number of the genuine work-seekers at 5 per cent. of the whole, though in special cases a much higher percentage was allowed. The Vagrancy Committee, on the evidence placed before them, estimated the proportion of genuine work-seekers at 3 per cent. of all casual paupers.
These figures are in keeping with all we know of the experience of the Poor Law Inspectors who report from year to year to the Local Government Board upon the vagrancy question. To quote one opinion only by way of illustration:—
"The more I see of the vagrant class the more strongly I am impressed with the conviction that the number of those really in search of work is relatively very small. Over and over again I have gone into the casual wards and have, in answer to my question, been told by the vagrants that they were all seeking work but could not find any; but when I have pointed out that farmers were everywhere advertising for hands, they had nothing to say, except, perhaps, that farm labour did not suit them. In the agricultural districts it may be said, generally, that enough labourers can rarely be obtained, and the local newspapers are scarcely ever without advertisements for them. No doubt some of the able-bodied paupers know nothing of farm work, and if they can be enticed to labour colonies, which would teach them, agriculture may gain, but there is a large demand for absolutely unskilled men which they refuse to supply. For example, last summer, a tradesman in a small town in Somerset asked the master of the workhouse to send him half-a-dozen labourers, to whom he would give permanent employment for 18s. a week. Six of the occupants of the casual wards professed themselves as eager to accept this offer, but, on leaving the workhouse in the morning, all but one slipped away. That one remained, and has been earning his 18s. a week ever since, but the other five have presumably found begging more profitable."[13]
The Local Government Board, as we have seen, have endeavoured to check vagrancy by urging Boards of Guardians to adopt the cell system, and to impose upon the casuals systematic labour tasks proportioned to the frequency of their visits. Yet though the cell system has been pressed upon workhouse authorities since 1868, so far only two-thirds of them have adopted it. As to the labour task, the Local Government Board advise that vagrants should, as a rule, be detained for two nights and required to perform a full day's work, but that the period of detention should be extended to four nights in the case of those who seek admission twice within the same month.