3.5 The Government, Self Help And Charity Flashcards
Andover Workhouse
Andover Union in Hampshire
- named a model union due to abolished outdoor relief and had very strict regulations in the workhouse
- 1837 = Colin McDougal and wife = appointed as master and matron of Andover
- they were so trusted that inspections = hasty and infrequent
- rumours began to circulate about the poor conditions the paupers lived in
Andover Scandal
- the master and matron treated them badly - kept expenditure and food rations to the minimum - and treated the inmates harshly and w/o dignity - had to eat w/fingers and denied extra food at Christmas and Queen Victorias coronation
- 1845 = a rumour spread in the neighbourhood that men assigned to crushing bones to create fertiliser were eating the tiny marrow and gristle scraps due to their hunger. When an especially succulent piece came in they would fight over it
- One guardian Hugh Mundy took raised this rumour ata aboard meeting but received little support (only suspended bone crushing in hot weather) and then he took it to local MP Thomas Wakeley
What did Thomas Wakeley do?
On the 1st August he enquired about the supposed situation in Andover in parliament to which the Home Secretary expressed disbelief but made a promise to enquire
What happened after the Home Secretary promised to enquire?
The next day = Henry Parker (Assistant Poor Law Commissioner) in charge of the Andover Union was sent to investigate
- finding the rumours to be true (e.g. inmates were regularly given less than their average ration of bread) and with the resignation of McDougal on Sep 29th as master, Parker suggested the former master of the Oxford workhouse
- however he had been dismissed for misconduct and therefore Parker found himself being asked to resign by the Commission as they needed a scapegoat - they went under attack from the press, the public and parliament.
- in November of the same year the Commission forbade the use of bone crushing in workhouses but the public were still discontent so in March 1846 = the Parliamentary Select Committee was supposed to enquire
- the Andover Committee then discovered many secrets regarding the treatment of paupers in Andover
What did the Andover Committee uncover?
- McDougal = regularly drunk and had bloody and violent fights with his wife to the pointe that she threatened suicide
- McDougal attempted to seduce some of the young women (his son also did this as he was a schoolmaster)
- mistreatment of the dead - e.g. a baby was buried with an old man to save the cost of the coffin
- Babies were rarely baptised due to the cost and any death in infancy was declared a still birth to avoid questions about the baptisms
What was put in place to replace the Poor Law commission?
The Poor Law Board in 1847
- this aimed to overhaul weaknesses of the PLC and also increased govt. involvement
Therefore several cabinet members of the Board = ex-officio = most responsible for the Poor Law were also answerable to parliament and public opinion
However: George Nicholls (one of the og PLC) remained and became secretary to the Board and most Assistant Commissioners also stayed. Numbers increased from 9 to 13
Successes of the Poor Law Board 1847-75
- 1870 Forsters Education Act = board schools funded and managed by the PLB where voluntary church schools were lacking
- 1850s = several unions set up public dispensaries = dispensed medicines to paupers
- From 1852 a poor person who couldn’t pay for medical treatment or prescribed medicines AUTOMATICALLY qualified for relief
- the connections between medicines and less eligibility were beginning to be broken
- Passing of the Poor Law Schools Act = allowed unions to work together to provide district schools
- Instigated the setting up of ‘pauper hospitals’ which were separate to workhouses
- 1865 Union Chargeability Act made it so that the financial burden was on the Union as a whole rather than each individual parish
- 1869 Poor Law Loans Act allowed guardians to borrow money from the Public Works Commission for up to 30 years
Failures of the Poor Law Board 1947-75
- the popularity of outdoor relief continued to increase = against the basic principle of the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834
- Metropolitan Poor Act - provided specialist mental hospitals and asylums in London
- The changes and development in Poor Law Medical services didn’t happen due to a conscious or specific plan but in response to need and public opinion
- Guardians (despite the offer of loans) still keep expenditure on paupers as low as possible
- Union Chargeability Act = failed to create a uniform system nationally = unpopular and difficult to impose
Poor Law Board’s dissolution
- by the 1870s the govt. = in erased awareness and concern for the welfare of the people
- new public health legislation = relied increasingly on local authorities = made sense to ensure the Poor Law was also given to local authorities
= Poor Law Board replaced by the Local Government Boards
What did the Local Government Boards do
a) condemned outdoor relief
b) asked Boards of Guardians to help paupers emigrate
c) asked charities to provide more support to paupers
Parliamentary Reform Act 1867
- extended the voting qualification to include householders
- doubled the electorate from one million to two million men and the ‘respectable’ working class could vote = many industrial boroughs had the majority of the electorate being the working class
Impact of the Parliamentary Reform Act on Poor Law policy
- More pressure to make the election of guardians more democratic as previously the ratepayers w/the most amount of property could vote more than once depending on their wealth
- increased involvement of the better off working class within the franchise = increased govt. awareness of the welfare of the people
How women helped stop poverty 1847-80?
- mothers in the home would manage their husbands earnings and frequently supplement it with casual earnings
- used gifts from the middle class and took them to the pawn shop to exchange them for necessary things e.g. coal tickets sold on for cash and fine clothes from the middle classes could be taken to the pawnshop and exchanged for pies, biscuits, bread and butter
- women took advantage of what they were given and turned it into what they really needed
Groups responsible for poverty, 1847-80
Charities, unions and friendly societies
Success of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Charity Organisation Society (COS)
- opposed to being indiscriminate as they believed that charity was a gift not a right and should only be provided to the deserving poor
- influential people supporting them e.g. members of the House of Commons, aristocracy, the armed forces, the professions and the Established Church attended the inauguration meeting
- they organised the work of other charities to better coordinate their efforts and ensure charitable relief was given
- had lots of publicity and propaganda that emphasised its success
Failures of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Charity Organisation Society (COS)
- weren’t a national organisation
- non-funded = difficult to maintain e.g. provincial branches failed to recruit sufficient volunteers or raise enough funds
- provided temporary relief only for a permanent benefit
- rigorous investigative methods = resented by the poor
- many charities became alienated
- Boards of Guardians has strained relationships with the local COS branches as the guardians regarded them to be interfering with who they chose to administer the Poor Law
Success of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Friendly Societies
- originally groups of people joining to help each other in times of need
- were entitled to payment during times of: sickness, death, unemployment
- promise if security = freed from the processes, procedures and shame of pauperism plus companionship
- fulfilled one of the aims of the Poor Law Amendment : that self help institutions should be the main source of poor relief
Failures of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Friendly Societies
Not ok working people were able to benefit as:
- many societies charges an entry fee and all of them expected a weekly contribution to funds = about 6d a week = impossible for the poorest workers who frequently suffered from irregular employment
- some societies fined the members who missed a payment = debt on top of what they already needed
- some = refused membership for those with a history of illness or those above 40
- people with dangerous occupations like mining were rarely accepted as members
- fully paid up members = not always assured of benefits they needed
- some societies were badly managed and collapsed
Success of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Trade unions and co-operatives
- expanded rapidly from mid to late 19th century due to industrialisation
- Worked to negotiate or fight for improved working conditions and higher pay
- Many = trade or skill based e.g. Amalgamated Society of Joiners and Carpenters
- Members of unions could often afford a weekly subscription of around 1 shilling = received a range of benefits e.g. pensions, benefits for sickness and death, some unions even offered unemployment pay
- it was a self help movement = coop shops were owned by their members who were paid a dividend on every purchase they made
- In just 7 years = 130 shops spread through north England and by 1880 = close to a million co-op shareholders
- Received dividends and non adulterated foodstuffs = could pay rent or if they couldn’t afford it left their dividends with the co-op to accrue interest
- Gave many families a chance to plan their finances
Failures of groups at dealing with poverty 1847-80: Trade unions and co-operatives
- some unions weren’t as generous e.g. the Brickmakers Society of London didn’t offer a sickness fund
- membership of the co-op movement = limited to skilled and semi-skilled members of the working class
- The poorer you were, the less you could spend = the smaller you’re dividend
- In times of downturned trade, sickness and temporary distress, the co-op societies did limit their credit to the members
Individuals responsible for poverty, 1847-80: Samuel Smiles
- began writing articles on parliamentary reform whilst he was a medical student and gave up medicine to become a journalist
- operated mostly in Leeds and was a strong supporter of the Leeds co-operative societies and the Leeds Railway society
- Initially supported Chartism but became concerned with their advocation of physical violence and so began to distance himself
- Argued that individual reform was needed alongside parliamentary reform. In 1859 published a book called Self help and biographies of successful individuals
- in 1896 and 1898 his publisher refused to publish his last book and then in 1904 his publisher destroyed the manuscript
Individuals responsible for poverty, 1847-80: Charles Dickens
His work emphasised:
1. The poor were people with hopes and desires like everyone else - humanised them
2. Workhouse system = mindless and cruel institution that dehumanised staff and paupers alike
- grew up in poverty and at 12 = sent to work in appalling conditions in a factory
- ensured his work was popular: became a journalist for the Morning Chronicle and published novels in weekly or monthly instalments = middle classes and the literate poor read them
- Oliver Twist (1837-38), Bleak House (1852) are examples where the workhouse system is criticised heavily
- Dickens successfully acted as a voice for the poor and attracted the interest of the middle classes
Individuals responsible for poverty, 1847-80: Henry Mayhew
- Worked as a journalist and founded the satirical magazine Punch (sold 6000 copies a week in the 1840s) and wrote for the Illustrated London News and the Morning Chronicle
- 1849 = wrote a series of articles in the Morning Chronicle in which he described the lives of Poor in London = all gathered and published as a book called ‘London Labour and the London Poor’ = which attracted the general public
- visited the homes and workplaces of the poor and wrote about what he saw, heard, smelt and felt = revealed the extent to which London relied on the unskilled and casual labour for their economy
Divided labouring poor:
1. Those who’ll work: able-bodied poor who undertook an enormous range of jobs e.g. carpenters, bricklayers
2. Those who cannot work: able bodied poor who didn’t work as there were no jobs for them to do
3. Those who will not work: those who can work but choose not to
