3.3 Flashcards
(49 cards)
1
Q
Elizabethan poor law 1601
A
- parish set poor rate and determined wether eligible and how much
- parish used unpaid, non professional administrators
2
Q
administering poor law
A
- paid officals in large towns
- setting work was up to churchwardens and overseers of the poor (e.g farmers - those who had to pay poor rate)
- argued to be more humane as locals would know better what each other needed
- also had opportunity for tyrannical behaviour from overseeres
- local crisis e.g poor harvest could put immense burden on locally raised finances
3
Q
Catogerisation of the poor
A
- implemented in attempt to bring some consistency
- writers and reformers regarded poverty as inevitable and neccessary e.g only through fear of poverty would people work
- ‘indigence’ was wrong -> poor laws never attempted to stop poverty but to force poor people to work to stop more indigence
- 19th century ‘deserving’ (old, sick children) and ‘undeserving’ (drunkenness) poor
- all help to undeserving contained elements of punishment
- fears poor may be attracted to idle life
4
Q
When was the settlement act?
A
1662
5
Q
Aims of the settlement act
A
clarify existing problems with settlement under elizabethan poor laws
6
Q
Achievements of settlement act 1662
A
- legal settlement by birth, marriage, apprentaship
- 1667 further tightened, strangers could not work without settlement certificate
- designed to ensure burden of providing for poor was not too much for parish
7
Q
Limitations of the settlement act
A
- most strangers left alone until tried to claim relief -> 1795 removal act
- prevented paupers who did not have legal settlement from getting help
- overseeres manipulated the system
- lots of arguments between parishes who wanted to keep their poor rate low
- hated and evaded by paupers
8
Q
Overall impact of settlement act
A
- genuine attempt to provide every person with a cleary defined legal settlement
- clear criteria for removal and settlement
- ineffective as corrupt and hated
- could not manage a mobile population/keep up with the issuing and carrying out of settlement orders
9
Q
Outdoor relief
A
- able bodied paupers in their own homes
- easy and flexible e.g breadwinner ill or cyclical unenemployment
- new outdoor relief systems needed after 1750 due to industralisation
- bad harvests and strain of napeolonic wars bought poor law to breaking point
10
Q
When was the speenhamlands system?
A
1795
11
Q
Aims of speenhamlands
A
- provide relief by subsidising low wages
- use price of bread and number of dependants in family
12
Q
Achievements of speenhamlands
A
- most widley used
13
Q
Limitations of speenhamlands
A
- some took each child into consideration but some only took into account once over a certain number
- did not always give cash, some flour
14
Q
Overall impacts of speenhamlands
A
- widley adopted over south and east
- seasonal unemployment been exacerbated by the loss of cottage industries and lack of avalibility of allotments to grow own and loss of common land (enclosure) = hamper success
- never given legal backing despite attempts
15
Q
Aim of Roundsman system
A
method for work to be found in parishes where there are too many paupers for work avaliable
16
Q
method of the roundsman system
A
- gave each pauper a ticket for an employer authorising them to work under the parish
- when returned with signed ticket, parish make up the difference between wage from poor rates
17
Q
Limitations of the roundsman system
A
- farmers took advantage as they did not have to pay set wages
18
Q
Aims of the labour rate
A
provide relief that avoided problems of roundsman
19
Q
Sucess of labour rate
A
- established a labour rate and usual poor rate across parishes
- ratepayers who employed pauper and paid them at the rate set did not have to pay poor rates
- prevented the abuse of roundsman
- 1832 one in five parishes used
20
Q
Elizabethan indoor relief system
A
- poorhouses, workhouses and houses of correction
- impotent poor to be in poorhouses, able bodied poor in workhouses and those who refused in houses of correction
- however did not work in practise and was not cost effective
- many realised needed to find a more cost effective way e.g some already combined
- outdoor relief remained most common
21
Q
When was the Gilberts act
A
1782
22
Q
What was the aim of the gilberts act
A
- aid the struggling administrative system of relief -> soldiers and sailors after american war, enclosure created long term unemployment and pressure on urban cities from industrialisation
23
Q
Achievements of the gilberts act
A
- parishes could combine in poor law unions to build and maintain workhouses
- required to submit reports of poor law expenditure
- ministers and churchwardens required to provide information about local charities
- able bodied excluded from workhouses, only impotent
- parish guardian had to find work for able-bodied, if not then outdoor relief provided
24
Q
Limitations of gilberts act
A
- permissive despite attempts to make mandatory
25
Overall impact of Gilberts act
- parishes were slow to adopt and not forced to
- 1834 (new poor law), 924 parishes combined into 67 unions
- all unions in rural areas of midlands, south east and east
26
When were the Sturges-Bourne acts
1818 and 1819
27
Aims of S-B
tie landowners, gentry and upper class more firmly into administration of poor relief
28
Successes of S-B
- elected men to parish select vestries to be responsible for local administration
- distinguished between deserving and undeserving poor to decide relief
- 1825, 46 select vestries had been formed and reported a significant drop in cost of relief
- national reduction in cost after first year = 9%
29
Limitations of S-B
- permissive and only applied to parishes who voted to adopt
- reduction is cost wouldve been at the expense of the destitute
30
Less eligibility and workhouse test
- paupers should fear the workhouses
- conditions inside had to be less desierable than outside
- Lowe policy 'less eligibility'
- workhouse test = only genuine destitue would accept relief on these terms
- children, old, sick and disabled exempt from test as deemed deserving
31
When were the Napelonic war with France
1783-1815
32
Impact of the war
- led to greater demands for poor relief
- pressure of poor law
- almost bought state to collapse
33
Impact of the war on harvests
- 1813 and 1814
- harvests good
- cheap foreign corn could be imported from europe = forces farmers to keep prices low
- had to pay wartime taxes and intrests to cover costs of enclosures
- many went bankrupt = unemployment for labourers
- forced to claim relief
- those who lasted had to pay labourers less = push to pauperism
34
How did the Tory gov try to improve in 1815
- corn laws to protect british farmers = not allowed import of foreign corn until british corn reached 80 shillings a quater
- many resented the corn laws as believed kept price of bread too high = riots as poor could not afford bread
35
Impact of post-war distress
- more people than ever claiming relief
- began to view relief as a right
- returning soldiers, dislocation of trade and poor harvests made situation
- radical protests exacerbated forcing gov to suspend habeas corpus and introduce the six acts
- forced the gov to be repressive = unlikely to legislate any help to relief
- 1817 report condemned Poor law for creating poverty
36
When were the swing riots?
1830
37
Aims of swing riots
- higher wages
removal of the steam-powered thresing machienes that created cyclical unemployment = forcing them into poverty
38
Successes of swing riots
- village in sussex demanded higher allowances -> frightened gentry who agreed to demands
- revealed pent up greviances against changes in farming and harsh poor relief policies
- forced authorities to deal with problem
- created a political climate in parliament where poor law reforms were becoming more likely
39
Events of the swing riots
- Hampshire - broke threshing machines and pulled down workhouses
- Wiltshire violently targeted MP, who drew harsh allowance for poor relief
- petitions and threats signed
40
Regional differnces - Nottinghamshire
- fifth most industralised country in Britain = relatively prosperous
- knitting industry and alternate industries for when less rural employment
- 1820-23 expenditure of relief less than 11 shillings - well below average
- Rev Becher driving force behind amalgamtion go 49 parishes into a large union -> emphasis on kindness and education for children
- Rev Lowe wanted outdoor relief abolsihed and make WH a place of fear
- Nicholls saw allowance systems as responsible for the continuation of poverty
41
Regional differences - Gloucestershire
- 1830 Lloyd Baker started reforming poor law administration
- used an allowance system
- introduced rigirous reforms and in two years number of paupers fell from 977 to 125
- abolsihed outdoor relief and made WH so dreadful only desperate would go
- similar policies in Cornwall and Derbyshire
42
Regional differences - Berkshire
- gave able-bodied lower rate than normal
- removed 63 long-term recipients
- London, Bristol, Norwich similar
43
Similarities in regional differences
- all trying to lower cost of poor rates
- reduce pauperism
44
Thomas Malthus (1766-1834)
- economist specalised in demography
- argued population would outstrip all avaliable food supplies
- poor law made situation worse as encouraged poor to have more children to claim more relief
- favoured abolition of the poor law = force to keep families small as no finacial advantage and wages would rise as poor rate no more = everyone would prosper
45
David Ricardo (1772-1823)
- political economist agreeing with Malthus
- wrote on the principles of political economy and taxation (1817)
- idea of iron law of wages and wage fund
- as less money avaliable for wages, people drawn into pauperism = draining wage fund
- only way to break cycle was to abolish poor laws
46
Thomas Paine (1737-1809)
- writer and republican
- criticsed poor law for being inadequate
- proposed property tax on very rich to use to support systems for the poor e.g family allowances, pensions
- believed able-bodied should go into workhouses before recieving relief
47
Robert Owen
- radical factory owner
- blamed capitalist economic system for creating poverty
- built a community in his mill workers villages = no adult allowed to work 10.5hr+, sick pay, children had to be educated corporal punishment forbidden, sold goods to workers at cost price
- mills still had profit
47
Influence of Utilitariansim
- developed by Bentham
- principle based on happiness
- had profound influence on the thinking of those developing new poor law
believed:
- relief was a public responsibility and should be organised by central gov
- should be a gov minister responsible e.g looking at stats and WH
- all outdoor relief abolished and only relief given to those prepared to go to WH
- no discriminatioin between deserving and undeserving poor
48
Why did the government take action in 1832?
- general election 1831 elected Whigs (favour of reform)
- general consensus amoung properited class that something had to be done about increasing cost
- 1832 announced a royal commission would be set up to investigate poor laws
