contends, "is encouraged by indoor relief." In Poplar, Hackney, Islington, and other unions in which the expenditure upon outdoor relief is already enormous, there is a similar demand upon all sides for its extension.
Another somewhat singular address comes from Camber well. It purports to emanate, not from the candidates themselves, but from "the inmates of the Gordon Road workhouse" who are "gratified to know that Mr W. H—— is contesting the ward against Miss J—— . The aged inmates (rather ungallantly) wish him every success. Mr J—— is also an exceedingly able young man. Nunhead will do well to elect them." This address has some significance as marking the fast disappearing margin that divides the administrators of the Poor Law from the recipients of poor relief. It does not stand alone in this respect. Not long ago in another workhouse a memorial was extensively signed by the inmates in favour of the election of certain candidates, and it is becoming plain that the recipients of relief are occupying more and more a position to dictate the terms of their own relief. The writer was concerned a few years ago in an election in which the contest turned upon the out-relief question. The out-relief party won. At the first relief meeting of the newly elected Board applicants appeared before the Board with the election addresses of the out-relief party in their hands, which they flourished in the face of the Guardians present.
Passing from the consideration of the election addresses to other features of the election in question, one point that appears to be novel is the number of ex-officers of Guardians, some of them actually in receipt of retiring allowance from their Boards, who came forward as candidates for election. There were several of these in Lambeth, and at
