PHP&S - Paupers & Pauperism Flashcards
Organisation of the parish-based system, the problem of the ‘able-bodied pauper’, outdoor relief system , Speenhamland, Roundsamn and the labour rate
The Poor Law Act, passed in 1601, gave each parish authority over managing its poor rates
Because certain parishes were more than others, some people took advantage of the law by relocating to the more giving parishes
Extract form the legislation of the 1662 Settlement Act:
It shall and may be lawful upon complaint by the Church wardens or Overseers of the Poor of nay Parish to any Justice of the Peace within Forty days after any such Person or Person coming so to settle as aforesaid in any Tenement under the yearly value of Ten pound as for any two Justice of the Peace whereof one to be of the Quorum of the Division where any person or persons that are likely to be chargeable to the Parish shall come it inhabit their warrant to remove and convey such person or persons to such Parish where he or they last legally settled either as a native Householder Sojourner Apprentice or Servant for the space of forty days at the unless he or they give sufficient security for the discharge of the said Parish to bee allowed by the said Justices
- adapted from 14 Charles II, c.12
1622 Settlement Act
Enacted due to ratepayers’ objection to abuse this
Unfortunately, the regulations also decreased labour mobility and discourages jobless people from leaving their home parish to search for employment
Every pauper was required to have a formal settlement and settlement certificates were made
As a result, they indicated where a person in need of poor relief should apply for it
Let’s dates in terms of poor relief in Britain
1572: from now on, each individual could choose an overseer for the poor
1597: poor law act
1601: Elizabethan Poor Law Act
1662: Act of Settlement - each pauper’s place of legal settlement had to be identified
1691: the methods for achieving settlement were outlined
1697: people could relocate to a new parish as long as they brought a settlement statement
1723: individual parishes were permitted to rent out spaced to be used for Union purposes under Knatchbull’s Act
1743-1744: the act defined vagrants as those who: threatened to flee, abandoned their depends, returned to a parish where they were sailed, lived lazy lives, and started depending on the parish for their needs
1782: Gilbert’s Act - allowed Unions (under a Board of Guardians) to give outdoor relief while retaining workhouse places for the aged and infirm
1795: the Speenhamland method recognised a sliding scale for outdoor assistance based on grain price
1834: Poor Law Unions created
Conditions for legal settlement
Be conceived in the parish where the parents had a home
Give 40 days’ notice before moving to a parish after 1691 and after 1662 if planning on staying there for longer than 3 years
Be continuously employed for more than a year and a say by a residence (this led to short contracts, so people did not get a settlement)
Occupy a parish office
Have a previously received inadequate aid in that parish
Lease real estate worth more than £10 per year OR pay taxes on an asset values at more than £10 yearly
Have wed inside the parish
Have compelled a full seven-year apprenticeship with a resident
After 1662, if a man relocated outside of his settled parish, he was required to take a settlement certificate with him as proof that his home parish would cover his ‘removal’ expenses if he later filed a claim for poor rates
Naturally, parishes were reluctant to grant such certificates, so people opted to remain in their current residence where they knew that, should the need arise, they could easily claim the poor rates
The Settlement Laws provided the proprietors or large estates where they controlled the dwelling with a sign infant financial advantage
It was common for landowners to destroy vacant homes to decrease the population on their properties and deter emigrants from retuning
At the same time, they would hire labourers from nearby parishes, who might be let go at any time without raising wages in the parish where they worked
Although magistrates had the authority to order parishes to provide aid the the poor, this did not frequently occur because the landowners also served as judges and were less likely to issue relief orders to raise the rates for the poor
The Workhouse Test Act (1723)
The building of workhouses where poor relief would be supplied was made possible by Sir Edward Knatchbull’s legislation for Amending the Laws relates to the Settlement, Employment and Reilef of the Poor in 1723
Parishes had the authority to rent or purchase suitable housing, which meant this could be done by a single parish or by merging serval nearby parishes that would split the cost
The local Justice of the Peace (JP) was also able to assign the task of administering aid to someone who would provide food, clothing and housing for the needy in exchange for a weekly payment from the parish
There were around 600 parish workhouses constructed in England and Wales between 172e3 and 1750
Indoor relief came at a steep cost
Ineffective workhouse administration intensive social pressure for more compassionate treatment of the impoverished
Gilbert’s Act was eventually enacted as a result in 1782
Adam Smith wrote in his 1776 book “The Wealth of Nations” that the government should not meddle with the economy but rather let supply and demand rules work naturally
A common misconception among historians is that Smith was against aiding the poor and agreed that individuals unable to work should be left to fend for themselves, starving if necessary rather than receiving assistance from the government
In addition, it was believed that men would work for any pay rather than starving themselves or their families, and so paying less would be advantageous to both employers and the food industry
Although laissez-faire eventually came to be employed as a defence relief, this interpretation neither immediately nor convincingly follows on from Adam Smith’s work nor was it the position political economy was supposed to take from the outset
The act also saw the debut of the workhouse test, which required applicants for relief to enrol in a workhouse where they would be required to perform specific tasks in exchange for assistance
According to the guiding concept, making rash or reckless claims against the poor rates would be discouraged by attending the workhouse, and only those in extreme need would apply for ‘the house’
The 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act authorised the adoption of this idea
The first formal workhouse returns, which were made in 1776, revealed the existence of around 2,000 workhouses, each housing 20-50 inmates
The Speenhamland system
The Settlement Laws of 1662 limited the parish’s responsibility to caring for people who has a permanent settlement there, restricting it from the 1601 Elizabethan Poor Law’s requirements that each parish raises a rate for alleviating poverty within its jurisdiction
Gilbert’s Act barred the physically fit poor from the workhouse and required parishes to offer either work or outdoor relief for this category of individuals
The Workhouse Test Act (Knatchbull’s Act) of 17234 required the poor to join workhouses to get relief, and indoor relief was limited to looking after the elderly, ill, handicapped and dependent children
Inflation
Britain got embroiled in the French wars in 1793
Because of this, importing food products from Europe became more challenging and bread prices rose quickly
Due to a string of subpar crops, there were food shortages simultaneously
The relationship between high bread prices, food shortages and riots was well-known in Britain
Therefore, on 6 May 1795, the magistrates of the Berkshire village of Speen met at the Pelican Inn to discuss ways to quell any potential unrest
Because they believed that the present state of the poor law required further assistance than had generally been given to them, they decided to implement an allowance scale whereby a labourer would have his income supplemented to subsistence level by the parish, according to the price of bread and the number children in his family
Resolution:
That it is not expedient for the Magistrates to grant that assistance by regulating the Wages of Day Labourers, according to the directions of the Statutes of the 5th Elizabeth and 1st James: But the Magistrates very earnestly recommended to the Farmers and other throughout the country, to increase the Pay of their Labourers in proportion to the present price of provisions; and agreeable thereto, the Magistrates now present, have unanimously resolved that they will, in several divisions, make the following calculations and allowances for relief of all poor and industrious men and their families, who to the satisfaction of justices of their Parish, shall endeavour (as far as they can) for their own support and maintenance
Opinions of the system
In the south of England, the concept spread quickly and it is believed that they systems prevented many families from going hungry
William Pitt the Younger, Prime Minister during that period, made and effort to get the plant put into law, but he was unsuccessful
Nevertheless, this system of poor relief was not a national one
After 1815, during the post-war downturn, it was thought that more employment in rural areas was necessary to lower unemployment
The Captain Swing riots of 1830 broke out in the counties where the system was particularly prevalent
As time went on, scholars, including Thomas Malthus, claimed that the system tended to increase the population because it pushed labourers to marry earlier than they could have otherwise
Variations on the Speenhamland system
Granting allowances without delay
The Roundsman system, under which impoverished people were sent to work for different farmers and paid from the poor rates
Those requesting poor relief were assigned to projects like road repair. They highways rate fund was used to pay them. However, the same people who funded the substandard rates also contributed to this fund
The labour rate was a separate fee applied to land occupants. Employers had two options: they could pay their portion of the rate or use their contribution to hire workers who had reached a ‘settlement’ at the going rate
1832 Employment of Labourers Act
Gave sanction to the labour rate:
The Poor Law Amendment Act went into effect on 25 March 1834, the same day the 1832 Employment of Labourers Act ended
Following Sturges-Bourne’s plural voting method, the 1832 act permitted a majority of 75% of the proprietors in a parish to accept the labour rate, provided thar the JPs at the Petty sessions agreed the the proposal
The number of settled able-bodied labourers was multiplied by their supposed market value to determine the overall labour cost for the parish
Each employer was then required to hire a certain number of labourers depending on rateable value or land
Those who declined to fill their quota of open positions paid the price differential in the low-wage rates
Both landowners and tenant farms, who employed large numbers of workers, preferred the labour rate to the demoralising Roundsman system
However, the Royal Commisson of Inquiry into the Poor Law criticised the labour rate because it failed to discriminate between free and pauper labour
The Roundsman system
In the Elizabethan Poor Law, the Roundsman system (the billet, ticket, or item system) was a form of organised labour exchange for the poorest labourers
A parish vestry assisted in paying nearby farmers, households and other parties to employ such applicants for relief at a rate of headline wages negotiated and set by the parish
The employers were reimbursed for whatever salaries they advanced above a meagre wage amount out of the poor rate (local taxation)
Therefore it depended no on the services provided but on the applicants’ desires
From parish to parish and occasionally depending on the sort of labour, variations of the Roundsman system operated and coexisted
Following this scheme, the parish, in general, agreed to sell a farmer the labour of one or more paupers for a set price, paying the pauper the difference between that price and the subsistence rate out of the parish finances (the difference being an allowance which the scale, according to the price if bread and the number of his family, awarded him)
The ticket signed by the overseer that the pauper typically carried to the farmer as a warrant for his employment and later handed back to the overseer, signed by the farmer, as proof that he had satisfied the terms of relief, gave rise to the local moniker billet or ticket system
In other situations and parishes, the parish entered into a contract with a person to have the poor execute some labour for him at a certain fee
The parish paid the poor from the person’s and the parish’s public money
Labour rate
Between 1832 and 1834, England operated the labour rate, a system of poor relief (outdoor relief) where the workers were paid a set rate
If not, the remaining about had to be covered by the Parish’s poor relief
Before being abolished by the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, it was authorised by the Agricultural Labourers Act of 1832 and used in around 1 in 5 parishes
Indoor relief
The poor who could work were primarily given outdoor assistance to stay home and look for a job
Indoor relief was designed for people who couldn’t care for themselves, such as older people, sick people and orphaned children
Indoor relief including transporting orphans to orphanages and brining the needy to nearby almshouses, hospitals and the hospitals for the mentally ill
Since the dawn of time, there has been an issue with providing relief to the needy
A tax was imposed on land and structures in the 17th and 18th centuries, with the money raised going to the parish’s needy
Outdoor relief, which offered cash for necessities like food and clothing, or inside relief in the form of the workhouse were the 2 ways that aid was supplied
Rules for indoor relief
The poor would be taken to the local almshouse
The ill would be admitted to hospital
Orphans were taken to an orphanage
The idle poor would be taken to a poorhouse or workhouse where they would be set work
Older parents were typically obliged to live with their children because of a provision in the 1601 law that said poor parents and children were accountable for one an other
However, because the parish served as the fundamental unit of ineffective lane administration, everyone in need was cared for at the parish’s expense
In England and Wales, there were around 15,000 parishes, each of which was built around a parish church
Any mechanism did not enforce the 1601 act’ measures and the bad law’s application needed to be more consistent
Because no administrative requirements were outline in the statute, parishes were free to apply any interpretation they saw fit
The Elizabethan Act was designed to assist the settled poor who were unemployed for whatever reason, including illness, a harsh winter or a downturn in the economy
These people were presumed to accept any job or assistance the parish provided, whether inside or outside help
Neither form of aid was perceived as harsh or punitive
The sturdy beggars prowling the streets, robbing travellers and generally end an ageing civil order were the target of this attempt to discourage or deal with them
Gilbert’s Act of 1782
Farmers who owned land, who were the primary employers in parishes and who paid poor tax, gained more clout as the result of the Gilbert’s Act
The right to vote in proportion to the quantity of verity occupied was provided
Farmers who owned land and employed a large portion of the parish men were able to exert influence over the system and profit from it
They frequently offered modest salaries, allowing the needy to boost their incomes
Gilbert’s Act was designed to enable the poor relief system to function moe efficiently and to give them more opportunities
The truth was a little difference since it prevented people from going to the workhouse, but its implementation helped the landowner who employed them more
It allowed parishes to band together to create unions and offer assistance
It was suggested that only they ‘impotent poor’ should reside in a workhouse and that everyone who was physically fit should be encouraged to work and use the outdoor restroom
Although there had been some changes, such as the 1662 Settlement Act, the 1601 Elizabethan Poor Lae remained the foundation of poor assistance in Britain until 1834
Gilbert’s Act, passed to replace the 1723 WorkhouseTest Act with a more compassionate means of alleviating poverty, was another alternation
Due to high food prices, poor wages and the impact of the enclosure, there was an upsurge in under and unemployment in rural areas during thr 1980s
Agricultural workers were particularly hard hit and relied on poverty rates to survive
Poor rates consequently rose quickly, which the landowners found unacceptable
Because Thomas Gilbert (1720-98) supported the Duke of Bedford, he could not get his Act for the Better Relief and Employment of the Poor approved in 1765
Because he and Bedford were political rivals, the PM, Charles Watson Wentworth, opposed the law on factional grounds
Gilbert worked on getting his bill passed for the following 17 years
Ironically, under Rockingham’s second ministry, he successes in 1982
The law allowed the parishes to join unions to share the cost of providing poor relief through poor homes, which were built specifically to care for the elderly, the ill and the infirm
These poorhouses were explicitly forbidden to able-bodied paupers
Instead, they were given outdoor relief and employment near their homes
Landowner, farmers and other employers were to receive allowances from the parish rates to raise wages to subsistence levels
Gilbert’s Act frequently cited as evidence of the government’s humanitarianism
Still, it was more significant in aiming to involve the gentry more closely in the administration of poor relief and in broadening the scope of poor relief
Gilbert added to an earlier act by enacting legislation in 1786 which required parishes to prosecute precise data on poor law expenditure and charitable payments to the poor during the previous three years
The so-called Gilbert Returns attempted to pass legislation based on quantitative evince and demonstrate the intimate relationship between public and private charity in reformers’ ideas
