Historiography of the Poor Laws

Last updated

The Historiography of the Poor Laws can be said to have passed through three distinct phases. Early historiography was concerned with the deficiencies of the Old Poor Law system, later work can be characterized as an early attempt at revisionism before the writings of Mark Blaug present a truly revisionist analysis of the Poor Law system.

Contents

Deficiencies of the Old Poor Law

Much of the early historiography of the poor law concerned the deficiencies of the Old Poor Law. One of the earliest academic attacks on outdoor relief was Joseph Townsend’s 1786 article “Dissertation on the Poor Laws” which criticized the Speenhamland system. [1] Thomas Malthus was the leading intellectual critic of the Poor Law system. His famous work Essay on the Principle of Population contained one chapter dedicated to the Poor Law, and many of his criticisms found their way into the Poor Law report of 1834, which overhauled the system

Early revisionism

The first real challenge to the traditional interpretation of the Poor Law occurred in 1911 with the publication of John and Barbara Hammond's The Village Labourer and, later in 1927 the publication in Beatrice and Sydney Webb’s English Local Government. Hammonds argued the Speenhamland system was a response to the enclosure system of the 17th century. The Webbs made important contributions to the historiography of the Poor Law. They are considered to be the first to point out that outdoor relief to able bodied paupers became important prior to 1795 and they were the first historians to critique the 1834 Report. Another early revisionist analysis occurs in the work of Karl Polanyi who argues in The Great Transformation that the Speenhamland system was introduced to reinforce the “paternalistic system of labour organisation”

Revisionism

The revisionist analysis of the Poor Law was first presented by Mark Blaug who in 1963 published the paper “The Myth of the Old Poor Law and the making of the New”. [2] Blaug's analysis rejects the notion that outdoor relief had a disastrous effect on the rural labour market. He argues that outdoor relief increased labour productivity, a conclusion at odds with the authors of the 1834 report. The work of Daniel Baugh, who has analysed poor relief in Essex, Sussex and Kent between 1790 and 1834, extends Blaug’s critique.

New Poor Law

There is also debate surrounding the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834. The Marxist interpretation of the New Poor Law is that the newly enfranchised middle-classes following the Reform Act 1832 (2 & 3 Will. 4. c. 45) were able to exploit the working classes by legislation which lowered workhouse conditions and made it more difficult to claim poor relief. The New Poor Law would also decrease the amount of tax being paid by the bourgeoisie. The working and pauper classes were still without the vote at this time and left powerless to oppose it. The workhouse system meant that the peasants and working class could be kept under strict control as opposed to the system of outdoor relief under the old poor law. It was feared that this system could lead to a rise against the ruling class as happened in the French Revolution. The traditionalist view is that there was more continuity with the previous system than change. Faced with unrest, the rich reasserted their control. A revisionist view fuses the above views and states the rich reasserted their control but through a capitalist system which was seen as exploitative of the working class.

The implementation of the Poor Law Amendment Act is also an area of debate. Rose argues that unions were able to evade the act and continue to offer outdoor relief. [3] Williams points to figures showing the number of able bodied receiving outdoor relief decreasing and the construction of workhouses to conclude that outdoor relief had been abolished by 1850. [4] Lees concludes that it was possible in some areas of the country to apply for outdoor relief after 1850. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English Poor Laws</span> Laws regarding poverty in England, 16th–19th century

The English Poor Laws were a system of poor relief in England and Wales that developed out of the codification of late-medieval and Tudor-era laws in 1587–1598. The system continued until the modern welfare state emerged after the Second World War.

The Speenhamland system was a form of outdoor relief intended to mitigate rural poverty in England and Wales at the end of the 18th century and during the early 19th century. The law was an amendment to the Elizabethan Poor Law. It was created as an indirect result of Britain's involvements in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1793–1815).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Workhouse</span> Institution for those unable to support themselves

In Britain and Ireland, a workhouse was an institution where those unable to support themselves financially were offered accommodation and employment. In Scotland, they were usually known as poorhouses. The earliest known use of the term workhouse is from 1631, in an account by the mayor of Abingdon reporting that "we have erected wthn [sic] our borough a workhouse to set poorer people to work".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pauperism</span> State of being supported at the public expense

Pauperism is poverty or generally the state of being poor, or particularly the condition of being a "pauper", i.e. receiving relief administered under the English Poor Laws. From this, pauperism can also be more generally the state of being supported at public expense, within or outside of almshouses, and still more generally, of dependence for any considerable period on charitable assistance, public or private. In this sense, pauperism is to be distinguished from poverty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poor Law Amendment Act 1834</span> United Kingdom poor relief law

The Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 (PLAA) known widely as the New Poor Law, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed by the Whig government of Earl Grey denying the right of the poor to subsistence. It completely replaced earlier legislation based on the Poor Relief Act 1601 and attempted to fundamentally change the poverty relief system in England and Wales. It resulted from the 1832 Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws, which included Edwin Chadwick, John Bird Sumner and Nassau William Senior. Chadwick was dissatisfied with the law that resulted from his report. The Act was passed two years after the Representation of the People Act 1832 which extended the franchise to middle-class men. Some historians have argued that this was a major factor in the PLAA being passed.

A poor law union was a geographical territory, and early local government unit, in Great Britain and Ireland.

The Roundsman System, in the Poor Relief Act 1601, was a form of organised labour exchange for the poorest labourers by which a parish vestry helped to pay local farmers, households and others to employ such applicants for relief at a rate of headline wages negotiated and set by the parish. It depended not on the services, but on the wants of the applicants: the employers being repaid out of the poor rate all they advanced in wages beyond a very low-wage amount. Variants of the Roundsman system operated and co-existed from parish-to-parish and sometimes depending on type of labour.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andover workhouse scandal</span> UK 1845 poor law scandal

The Andover workhouse scandal of the mid-1840s exposed serious defects in the administration of the English 'New Poor Law'. It led to significant changes in its central supervision and to increased parliamentary scrutiny. The scandal began with the revelation in August 1845 that inmates of the workhouse in Andover, Hampshire, England were driven by hunger to eat the marrow and gristle from bones which they were to crush to make fertilizer. The inmates' rations set by the local Poor Law guardians were less than the subsistence diet decreed by the central Poor Law Commission (PLC), and the master of the workhouse was diverting some of the funds, or the rations, for private gain. The guardians were loath to lose the services of the master, despite this and despite allegations of the master's drunkenness on duty and sexual abuse of female inmates. The commission eventually exercised its power to order dismissal of the master, after ordering two enquiries by an assistant-commissioner subject to a conflict of interest; the conduct of the second, more public inquiry drew criticism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poor Relief Act 1601</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Poor Relief Act 1601 was an Act of the Parliament of England. The Act for the Relief of the Poor 1601, popularly known as the Elizabethan Poor Law, "43rd Elizabeth" or the Old Poor Law was passed in 1601 and created a poor law system for England and Wales.

The Labour Rate was a system of poor relief, used in England from 1832 to 1834, where workers were paid at a given rate. If this was not met then the rest had to be made up by the parish's poor relief. It was authorised by the Agricultural Labourers Act 1832, and adopted in about 1 in 5 parishes until it was replaced by the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poor relief</span> British government and ecclesiastical action to relieve poverty

In English and British history, poor relief refers to government and ecclesiastical action to relieve poverty. Over the centuries, various authorities have needed to decide whose poverty deserves relief and also who should bear the cost of helping the poor. Alongside ever-changing attitudes towards poverty, many methods have been attempted to answer these questions. Since the early 16th century legislation on poverty enacted by the Parliament of England, poor relief has developed from being little more than a systematic means of punishment into a complex system of government-funded support and protection, especially following the creation in the 1940s of the welfare state.

The Outdoor Labour Test Order was a piece of policy issued by the Poor Law Commission on 13 April 1842 which allowed the use of outdoor relief to the able-bodied poor. The order was issued after there was some opposition to the commission's previous order stating that only indoor relief should be used. During times when the manufacturing industries were performing poorly this became impractical - however the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 had aimed to prevent the use of outdoor relief and replace it with indoor relief.

From the reign of Elizabeth I until the passage of the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 relief of the poor in England was administered on the basis of a Poor Relief Act 1601. From the start of the nineteenth century the basic concept of providing poor relief was criticised as misguided by leading political economists and in southern agricultural counties the burden of poor-rates was felt to be excessive (especially where poor-rates were used to supplement low wages. Opposition to the Elizabethan Poor Law led to a Royal Commission on poor relief, which recommended that poor relief could not in the short term be abolished; however it should be curtailed, and administered on such terms that none but the desperate would claim it. Relief should only be administered in workhouses, whose inhabitants were to be confined, 'classified' and segregated. The Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 allowed these changes to be implemented by a Poor Law Commission largely unaccountable to Parliament. The act was passed by large majorities in Parliament, but the regime it was intended to bring about was denounced by its critics as un-Christian, un-English, unconstitutional, and impracticable for the great manufacturing districts of Northern England. The Act itself did not introduce the regime, but introduced a framework by which it might easily be brought in.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws 1832</span>

The 1832 Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws was a group set up to decide how to change the Poor Law systems in England and Wales. The group included Nassau Senior, a professor from Oxford University who was against the allowance system, and Edwin Chadwick, who was a Benthamite. The recommendations of the Royal Commission's report were implemented in the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Irish poor laws</span> Acts of Parliament to address poverty and social instability in Ireland

The Irish poor laws were a series of acts of Parliament intended to address social instability due to widespread and persistent poverty in Ireland. While some legislation had been introduced by the pre-Union Parliament of Ireland prior to the Act of Union, the most radical and comprehensive attempt was the Irish act of 1838, closely modelled on the English Poor Law Amendment Act 1834. In England, this replaced Elizabethan era legislation which had no equivalent in Ireland.

The Scottish poor laws were the statutes concerning poor relief passed in Scotland between 1579 and 1929. Scotland had a different poor law system to England and the workings of the Scottish laws differed greatly to the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 which applied in England and Wales.

Poor Law policy after the New Poor Law concerns the time period c. 1847–1900 after the implementation of the Poor Law Amendment Act until the beginnings of the decline of the Poor Law system at the start of the 20th century.

The following article presents a timeline of the poor law system in England from its origins in the Tudor and Elizabethan era to its abolition in 1948.

Leigh Union workhouse, also known as the Leigh workhouse and after 1930, Atherleigh Hospital, was a workhouse built in 1850 by the Leigh Poor Law Union on Leigh Road, Atherton in the historic county of Lancashire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scottish poorhouse</span> Scottish facility to support and provide housing for the needy

The Scottish poorhouse, occasionally referred to as a workhouse, provided accommodation for the destitute and poor in Scotland. The term poorhouse was almost invariably used to describe the institutions in that country, as unlike the regime in their workhouse counterparts in neighbouring England and Wales residents were not usually required to labour in return for their upkeep.

References

  1. Boyer, George, An economic history of the English poor law, 1750–1850 p. 52
  2. Blaug, Mark (1963). "The myth of the old Poor Law and the making of the new". Journal of Economic History. 23: 151–84. Archived from the original on 2007-03-21. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  3. Michael E. Rose, The English Poor Law, 1780–1930 (Newton Abbot: David & Charles, 1971).
  4. Karel Williams, From Pauperism to Poverty (1981).
  5. Lynn Hollen Lees, The Solidarities of Strangers: The English Poor Laws and the People, 1770–1948 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.