The second half of the 18th century saw the issue of how to deal with the poor take a new direction. The advent of the rural Incorporation and the accompanying Houses of Industry added a new option in the perenial problem. 

The debating rooms around the county were filled with comment and debate on the merits of the different options open to the parish officers. Here are some thoughts and observations from two of Suffolk’s antiquarians on the matter. 

The letters written in 1763 between two of Suffolk’s most noted antiquarians of the time: Rev R Canning 1708-1775 rector of Harkstead 1738-1769 & Freston 1755-1775, and Rev Stephen White rector of Stratford St Mary demonstrate the depth of feeling of the upper classes towards the welfare of the poor.  S.R.O.(I) S1/1/84.1

Canning spoke of the advantages of the Nacton house of industry with respect to the rich. He clearly felt this was the most economically acceptable way to deal with the poor,  White on the other hand told of his concern at the rumours of hardship and bad management circulating in the community. He suggesting a letter placed in the Ipswich Journal informing the people of the inaccurate information being peddled in the community would be beneficial, Canning was of the opinion this was a waste of time. Instead he preferred to let time and experience educate the majority.

In response to rumours White had been told of plagues of rats infesting the workhouse, Canning suggested the risk was far greater in the community than it was in the workhouse.  On the subject of bedding. Canning emphasised the recent use of ‘ticking’ (a closely woven cloth used to contain the bedding material) coupled with a better quality of sheets, blankets and coverlets now being used had improved things. Also straw had now replaced the coarser oat chaff as the stuffing of the mattresses.  However a little surprisingly Canning assured White that any inmate who wanted to bring in his or her own bedding was perfectly able to. Though presumably these would have been thoroughly washed (and disinfected??) to avoid bringing disease into the house.  

While White suggested the wearing of badges by the poor was not being adhered to as it should be, Canning dismissed this effort of stigmatisation was being out dated, siting the fact that most poor tended to live separately from the better off thereby nullifying any stigmatisation between the two groups.  

Finally to emphasis his satisfaction with the way the Nacton house was run Canning suggested that members of the forthcoming incorporation of Samford would be well advised to follow the example (of Carlford and Colneis) incorporation, concluding ‘I can make myself answerable for the humane and benevolent treatment of the poor by our governor and his wife’.