3.3 Paupers And Pauperism (1780-1834) Flashcards
Who held responsibility for the poor up until 1834?
The Parish
- set the Poor Rate : a compulsory tax used to provide financial relief for the poor
- determined who was elegible for relief and how much
- decided what kind of relief should be given
Who was given the role of overseeing the poor within the parish?
- Churchwardens, local farmers and respectable homeowners : these were all unpaid non-professionals
- They became known as overseers of the poor. 1-2 in each parish were appointed every year by local Justices of the Peace
Advantages of Parish-led relief
- Poor Rates = spent by parish on local needs only
- Someone you knew could provide relief
- Local distinguish between the genuine needy and not
- Controlled lower classes = reduced mischief and crime
- Overseers frequently replaces
Disadvantages of Parish-led relief
- Class Relationships, lower rely on the upper = unable to become more independent
- Local crises e.g. bad harvest could affect the relief given
- Overseers freq.replaced = less experience and it may change who received the support
- Personal conflict = inconsistency
- Taxes to fund poor relief = resentment
- Settlement laws weren’t applied consistently
Categories of the Poor
Deserving Poor - poor through no fault of their own = worthy of relief
Undeserving poor - those whose poverty = a result of some moral failure like drunkenness or prostitution
Impotent poor - Puapers who couldn’t look after themselves
Ideal poor - those who refused to work and continued a life of begging and crime
Able - bodied poor - Paupers who wanted relief but were able to work
Settlement Act 1662
Legal settlement was by birth, marriage, apprenticeship or inheritance and this was people who could receive relief from that area
Indoor relief
Providing support for paupers in a workhouse. A workhouse gave shelter and food to the able-bodied poor in return for work whilst they tried to find a job
Administration Changes to Workhouses
- Thomas Gilbert introduced the Poor Relief Act 1782 to make workhouses more cost effective and efficient
- William Sturges-Bourne created 2 Acts to improve Indro relief administration
1782 - Poor Relief Act declarations (5)
- Parishes could combine as one union to build and maintain workhouses IF two thirds of the major ratepayers voted in favour = encouraged upper classes to get more involved in taking care of the poor
- Overseers to guardians = had particular links to the workhouse = streamlined the system and were paid and appointed by local magistrates
- Submit an annual document of Poor Law expenditure - Gilbert’s Record = comaprisons between parishes
- Ministers+church wardens = required to give info on local charities that provided poor relief = humanitarian and helped the poor
- Able bodied = excluded from Gilbert Union Workhouses - for impotent poor only (like almshouses)
Gilbert - Advantages
- Gentry encouraged to care for the poor = more funding
- Guardians knew more about the workhouse = could effectively provide what’s needed
- Gilbert’s Records allowed observation on system = wether the system was too overwhelmed
- Unions = Workhouse more effectively managed
Gilbert - Disadvantages
- Some changes weren’t mandatory in Parliament = not consistently enforced
- Able bodied poor excluded = less effective as poverty wasn’t reduced and increased mischief and crime to fund themselves
William Sturges-Bourne - 2 Acts he supported 1818 to 1819 o improve admin of poor relief and get the gentry on board
- New voting system - parishioners vote for the guardians appointed and the higher your status the more your vote counted for
- Resident clergyman added to vestry = used knowledge of parish to determine who was the undeserving poor and deserving poor = gave some authority to upper classes
Sturges-Bourne - Advantages
- More upper class involvement with poor relief = more funding = less strain on public (Poor Rate)
- Could adjust poor rate to their wealth
Sturges-Bourne - Disadvantages
- Clergyman could be biased
- decreased cost of relief = costs the destitute seeking relief
Indoor Relief 1601-1834
- Before = poorhouses and almshouses for the impotent poor; workhouses for the able-bodied and correction houses for the idle poor (never worked as they weren’t cost effective)
- Over next century : all houses were combined to create the Workhouse for able bodied poor (early ones = Newbury, Sheffield, Reading and Newark (1628)
- Workhouses crowded and dirty = sickness due to dirty beds but cheaper than outdoor relief and parishes could amalgamate their work with others
- 1723 - Workhouse Test Act by Knatchbull = principle of ‘less eligibility’ = decreased poor relief in workhouse
- By 1780 half of parishes in Suffolk had joined as Unions
Why Workhouses (indoor relief) were attractive to parishes ?
- Cheaper than outdoor relief
- Could amalgamate to fund the workhouse
- They could sell the work of the inmates to earn a profit = decreased strain on Poor Rate
- Opportunities to privatise = parishes paid contractors ‘farmers’ to run them = decreased cost of poor relief
Outdoor Relief
- Poor relief found the form of money, clothing, wage subsidies food etc.
- was easy to manage and flexible
However form 1750 = increase in population and poor harvest = increased demand for poor relief - Solutions = Speenhamland System, Roundsman System and the Labour Rate
Speenhamland System
- Allowance System - allowance system and provided relief by subsidising low wages
Speenhamland System - Advantages
- could take the form of flour
- Provided seasonal support - during harvest when most needed the support
Speenhamland - Disadvantages
- Variarion bewteeen areas of how they administered
- System never legally enforced = inconsistently applied as well as not being year round
- Struggled to apply it due to changing economic conditions - e.g. increased population and bad harvest caused prices of bread which the wages of bread were based on to fluctuate
Roundsman System
Was a method of making sure that in parishes where there were too many paupers (due to migration and urbanisation) and therefore and increased demand but a decrease supply of jobs at least some work could be found for all
Roundsman System - Successes
- All able-bodied paupers could get a job and earn a wage
- This was monitored by the parish = made sure they were getting paid
- Wage split between Leif system and employer = less strain on Poor Rate
Roundsman System - Failures
- Variation in how much was paid to the pauper e.g. a flat rate was good for a one person household but not for an extended family
- Farmers farmers could take advantage = didn’t require them to pay the pauper the full wage
Labour Rate
Was the Roundsman System without the initial failures : an agreement made between parishioners to establish a labour rate in addition to the poor rate therefore if you paid the pauper you employed their full wage you didn’t need to additionally pay the poor rate. If you didn’t pay your pauper their full wage you would have to pay the difference between the wages offered to the paupers and the going rate of the labour rate
