Why 1829? 141new target at which to level charges of exclusiveness, corruption, and extra-
vagance.
Concern about the cost of parish government initially was triggered by the
burgeoning cost of poor relief in the post-war years. In 1795, poor rates in
England raised £2.5 million. By 1818, the cost of poor relief nationally had
risen to nearly £8 million. David Eastwood notes that the cost of poor relief
in 1748-50 amounted to 6.1 per cent of total government spending, local and
central. By the post-war years, it was up to 11.6 per cent.^66 An improving
economy helped to lower rates by 1824 but a total expenditure of almost £6
million was still needed to maintain England's poor.^67 In urban parishes,
residential property often carried larger burdens than commercial property
because rate assessments did not take into account the contents of ware-
houses or factories. This meant that a high proportion of assessments were
made on persons of more limited means, such as retail tradesmen, pub-
owners, and householders. When the economy took downturns in the post-
war years and the late 1820s, poorer ratepayers had a hard time. Magistrates
often excused them on the grounds of poverty and parishes were left with
rising costs and decreasing revenues.^68 In May 1829, Bethnal Green was
£6390 in debt and unable to pay any of it, 'inasmuch as the Weekly Out-
Door Relief swallowed up the whole of what was collected'. The overseers
reported that they relieved nearly 5000 people three times a week at a weekly
expense of £750. This was in addition to casual relief and weekly pensions.^69
While poor relief represented the largest item in parish budgets, London
vestries had to fund other services city-dwellers were beginning to expect.
1\vo of the most visible and expensive were street-lighting and road-paving.
Gas street lights first appeared in 1815 and macadam road surfaces in 1823.
Replacing hundreds of street lamps and miles of pavement was not cheap.^70
London vestries also built churches though not all London ratepayers
thought this a legitimate public expense. The Church of England urged the
building of more churches because the tremendous growth in population
meant that there was not enough room in London's churches.^71 The Addi-
tional Churches Act of 1818 provided some funds from the central govern-
ment but also made local ratepayers liable to a church rate to fund repairs
and upkeep for 20 years if a new church was built in their parish.^72
Parochial authorities were not necessarily opposed to building new
churches but many seem to have taken on these projects without much
appreciation of the true costs. In St Pancras, over £100000 was spent in
the 1820s by the vestry on a new parish church and chapels of ease.^73 A critic
of the select vestry of the united parishes of St Giles and St George, Blooms-
bury, discovered that nearly £2150 had been spent out of the poor rates in
1822-23 for the repair and decoration of the Bloomsbury parish church.
'Both our churches are stone buildings, with fittings-up of oak, and are
comparatively new erections, yet the repairs and fanciful alterations are a