Consequences of the Poor Law Amendment Act

Question 1

Money - Continuity (3)

Answer 1

• It cost 4s 8d /week to keep a pauper in a workhouse, but only 2s 3d for outdoor relief so many kept handing out outdoor relief
• George Boyer estimated that indoor poor relief cost between 50-100% more than outdoor poor relief
• The number of workhouses that could be opened was also limited by their initial cost. In Banbury it cost £6200 to open a workhouse to house 300 people

Question 2

Money - change

Answer 2

The PLAA was intended to ban outdoor poor relief and the 402 workhouses built immediately after this happened suggests that this was the case in some areas

Question 3

Extent of Poor Relief - continuity (2)

Answer 3

• Opposition was so great to indoor relief in areas such as Lancashire and Yorkshire that by 1838 the Poor Law Commission allowed the use of old Poor Law methods should the need arise
• In the North of England, where there were many jobs due to industrialisation, guardians resisted paying large sums of money to open poor houses, where, due to cyclical economy and seasonal employment, they would be empty most of the time

Question 4

Extent of Poor Relief - change (2)

Answer 4

• The old system had
  15 000 parishes each responsible for the relief of poverty in their area. The PLAA amalgamated these into administrative groups of 30, each governed by a board of ratepayer elected guardians
• Despite opposition, the PLAA was well implemented in Southern Counties

Question 5

Impact on Paupers - continuity

Answer 5

Heavy dependence on geography

Question 6

Impact on Paupers - change (4)

Answer 6

• The Speenhamland System was abolished by Parliament in 1834. This had previously saved many from famine during poor harvests in the early 1800s in an attempt to mitigate rural absolute poverty
• The work that Paupers did in workhouses varied between poor houses, with some crushing animal bones and one in Guildford crushing stones for road building
• Workhouses made all inmates wear the same uniform and separated men from women and often this would lead to families becoming separated if they left the poor house

Question 7

Punishment/support - change (3) (no continuity)

Answer 7

• The workhouses were formed on the principle of “less eligibility” recommended in part by utilitarian Edwin Chadwick. This meant that workhouses were meant to be unpleasant as possible in order to deter people from applying for relief, so only the most destitute would use them
• Workhouses had existed before 1834, but due to the 1782 Gilbert Act, they were only for those unable to take care of themselves
• Workhouses made all inmates wear the same uniform and separated men from women

Question 8

Conclusion

Answer 8

The failure of the PLAA to create real change was due to the resistance to it. It passed through parliament only due to ideological pressures, not fully recognizing the problem it sought to resolve and so antagonizing many who received and implemented it. It AIMED to change many aspects of poor relief but this was not executed effectively.