The Full Wiki

Poor Law: Wikis


Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.


(Redirected to English Poor Laws article)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although many deterrent workhouses developed in the period after the New Poor Law, some had already been built under the existing system.[1] This workhouse in Nantwich, Cheshire dates from 1780.

The English Poor Laws[2] were a system of poor relief which existed in England and Wales[3] that developed out of late medieval and Tudor laws before being codified in 1587–98. The Poor Law system was in existence until the emergence of the modern welfare state after the Second World War.[1]

English Poor Law legislation can be traced back as far as 1536,[4] when legislation was passed to deal with the impotent poor, although there is much earlier Tudor legislation dealing with the problems caused by vagrants and beggars.[2] The history of the Poor Law in England and Wales is usually divided between two statutes, the Old Poor Law passed during the reign of Elizabeth I[5] and the New Poor Law, passed in 1834, which significantly modified the existing system of poor relief.[6] The later statute altered the Poor Law system from one which was administered haphazardly at a local parish level to a highly centralised system which encouraged the large scale development of workhouses by Poor Law Unions.[7]

The Poor Law system was not formally abolished until the 1948 National Assistance Act,[8] with parts of the law remaining on the statute book until 1967.[7] The Poor Law system fell into decline at the beginning of the 20th century due to several factors, such as introduction of the Liberal welfare reforms[9] and the availability of other sources of assistance from friendly societies and trade unions,[9] as well as piecemeal reforms which bypassed the Poor Law system.[10]




Medieval Poor Laws

The Poor Laws in the aftermath of the Black Death (pictured), when labour was in short supply, were concerned with making the able bodied work.[11]

The earliest medieval Poor Law was the Ordinance of Labourers which was issued by King Edward III of England on 18 June 1349, and revised in 1350.[12] The ordinance was issued in response to the 1348–1350 outbreak of the Black Death in England,[13] when an estimated 30–40% of the population had died.[14] The decline in population left surviving workers in great demand in the agricultural economy of Britain.[13] Landowners had to face the choice of raising wages to compete for workers or letting their lands go unused. Wages for labourers rose, and this forced up inflation across the economy as goods became more expensive to produce.[14] An attempt to rein in prices, the ordinance (and subsequent acts, such the Statute of Labourers of 1351), required that everyone who could work did; that wages were kept at pre-plague levels and that food was not overpriced.[15] In addition, the Statute of Cambridge was passed in 1388[16] and placed restrictions on the movement of beggars.[12]

Tudor Poor Law

The origins of the English Poor Law system can be traced as far back as late medieval statutes dealing with beggars and vagrancy but it was only during the Tudor period that the Poor Law system became codified. Monasteries were in decline and their eventual dissolution during the Reformation caused poor relief to move from a largely voluntary basis to a compulsory tax that was collected at a parish level.[17] Early legislation was concerned with vagrants and making the able-bodied work, especially while labour was in short supply following the Black Death.

Tudor attempts to tackle the problem originate during the reign of Henry VII. In 1495, Parliament passed a statute ordering officials to seize "[a]ll such vagabonds, idle and suspected persons living suspiciously and then so taken and set in stocks, there to remain by the space of three days and three nights to have none other sustenance but bread and water, and there after the said three days and three nights, to be had out and set at large and then to be commanded to avoid the town."[18] No remedy to the problem of poverty was offered by this; it was merely swept from sight, or moved from town to town. Moreover, no distinction was made between vagrants and the jobless; both were simply categorised as "sturdy beggars", to be punished and moved on.[19]

In 1530, during the reign of Henry VIII, a proclamation was issued, describing idleness as the "mother and root of all vices"[20] and ordering that whipping should replace the stocks as the punishment for vagabonds. This change was confirmed in statute the following year, with one important change: a distinction was made between the "impotent poor" and the sturdy beggar, giving the old, the sick and the disabled licence to beg. Still no provision was made, though, for the healthy man simply unable to find work. All able-bodied unemployed were put into the same category. Those unable to find work had a stark choice: starve or break the law. In 1535, a bill was drawn up calling for the creation of a system of public works to deal with the problem of unemployment, to be funded by a tax on income and capital. A law passed a year later allowed vagabonds to be whipped.[21]

For the able-bodied poor, life became even tougher during the reign of Edward VI. In 1547, a bill was passed that subjected vagrants to some of the more extreme provisions of the criminal law, namely two years servitude and branding with a "V" as the penalty for the first offence and death for the second. Justices of the Peace were reluctant to apply the full penalty.[22] The government of Elizabeth I, Edward VI's successor after Mary I, was also inclined to severity. An Act passed in 1572 called for offenders to be bored through the ear for a first offence and that persistent beggars should be hanged. However, the Act also made the first clear distinction between the "professional beggar" and those unemployed through no fault of their own. The first complete code of poor relief was made in the Act for the Relief of the Poor 1597 and some provision for the "deserving poor" was eventually made in the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601. The more immediate origins of the Elizabethan Poor Law system were deteriorating economic circumstances in Sixteenth century England. Historian George Boyer has stated that England suffered rapid inflation at this time caused by population growth, the debasement of coinage and the inflow of American silver.[2] Poor harvests in the period between 1595–98 causing the numbers in poverty to increase while charitable giving decreased after the dissolution of the Monasteries and religious guilds.[23]

Old Poor Law

The Old Poor Law or Elizabethan Poor Law[24] is sometimes referred to as the "43rd Elizabeth"[25] as it was passed in the 43rd year that Elizabeth I (pictured) reigned as Queen.

The Elizabethan Poor Law[17] of 1601 formalized earlier practices of poor relief contained the Act for the Relief of the Poor 1597 yet is often cited as the beginning of the Old Poor Law system.[26] It created a system administered at parish level,[27] paid for by levying local rates on rate payers.[28] Relief for those too ill or old to work, the so called 'impotent poor', was in the form of a payment or items of food ('the parish loaf') or clothing also known as outdoor relief. Some aged people might be accommodated in parish alms houses, though these were usually private charitable institutions. Meanwhile able-bodied beggars who had refused work were often placed in Houses of Correction or even subjected to beatings to mend their attitudes. Provision for the many able-bodied poor in the workhouse, was relatively unusual, and most workhouses developed later. The 1601 Law said that parents and children were responsible for each other, elderly parents would live with their children.[29]

The Old Poor Law was a parish based system,[30] there were around 1,500 such parishes based upon the area around a parish church. The system allowed for despotic behavior from the Overseers of the Poor[31] but as Overseers of the Poor would know their paupers they were considered able to differentiate between the deserving and undeserving poor making the system both more humane and initially more efficient.[31] The Elizabethan Poor Law operated at a time when the population was small enough for everyone to know everyone else, therefore people's circumstances would be known and the idle poor would be unable to claim on the parishes' poor rate. The system provided social stability yet by 1750 needed to be adapted to cope with population increases,[32] greater mobility and regional price variations.

The 1601 Act sought to deal with 'settled' poor who had found themselves temporarily out of work—it was assumed they would accept indoor relief or outdoor relief. Neither method of relief was at this time in history seen as harsh. The act was supposed to deal with beggars whom were considered a threat to civil order. The Act was passed at a time when poverty was considered necessary as fear of poverty made people work. In 1607 a House of Correction was set up in each county. However, this system was separate from the 1601 system which distinguished between the settled poor and 'vagrants'. There was much variation in the application of the law and there was a tendency for the destitute to migrate towards the more generous parishes, usually situated in the towns.[27] This led to the Settlement Act 1662 also known as the Poor Relief Act 1662, this allowed relief only to established residents of a parish; mainly through birth, marriage and apprenticeship. Unfortunately the laws reduced the mobility of labour and discouraged paupers from leaving their parish to find work.[33] They also encouraged industry to create short contracts (e.g. 364 days) so that an employee could not become eligible for poor relief.[27]

A pauper applicant had to prove a 'settlement'. If they could not, they were removed to the next parish that was nearest to the place of their birth, or where they might prove some connection. Some paupers were moved hundreds of miles. Although each parish that they passed through was not responsible for them, they were supposed to supply food and drink and shelter for at least one night. In 1697 an act was passed requiring those who begged to wear a "badge" of red or blue cloth on the right shoulder with an embroidered letter "P" and the initial of their parish.[34] However, this practice soon fell into disuse.[35]

The workhouse movement began at the end of the 17th century with the establishment of the Bristol Corporation of the Poor, founded by Act of Parliament in 1696.[36] The corporation established a workhouse which combined housing and care of the poor with a house of correction for petty offenders. Following the example of Bristol, some twelve further towns and cities established similar corporations in the next two decades. As these corporations required a private Act, they were not suitable for smaller towns and individual parishes.

Soldiers returning from fighting in the Napoleonic Wars put pressure on an already overstretched Poor Law system

Starting with the parish of Olney, Buckinghamshire in 1714 several dozen small towns and individual parishes established their own institutions without any specific legal authorization. These were concentrated in the South Midlands and in the county of Essex. From the late 1710s the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge began to promote the idea of parochial workhouses. The Society published several pamphlets on the subject, and supported Sir Edward Knatchbull in his successful efforts to steer the Workhouse Test Act through parliament in 1723.[37] The act gave legislative authority for the establishment of parochial workhouses, by both single parishes and as joint ventures between two or more parishes. More importantly, the Act helped to publicise the idea of establishing workhouses to a national audience. By 1776 some 1,912 parish and corporation workhouses had been established in England and Wales, housing almost 100,000 paupers. Although many parishes and pamphlet writers expected to earn money from the labour of the poor in workhouses, the vast majority of people obliged to take up residence in workhouses were ill, elderly, or children whose labour proved largely unprofitable. The demands, needs and expectations of the poor also ensured that workhouses came to take on the character of general social policy institutions, combining the functions of creche, and night shelter, geriatric ward and orphanage. In 1782, Thomas Gilbert finally succeeded in passing an Act[38] that established poor houses solely for the aged and infirm and introduced a system of outdoor relief for the able-bodied. This was the basis for the development of the Speenhamland system, which made financial provision for low-paid workers. Settlement Laws were altered by the Removal Act 1795 which prevented non-settled persons from being moved on unless they had applied for relief.[2]

During Napoleonic Wars it became impossible to import cheap grain into Britain which resulted in the price of bread increasing.[3] As wages did not similarly increase many agricultural labourers were plunged into poverty and the Tory government of Lord Liverpool[39] passed the Corn Laws[40] to keep the price of grain artificially high. 1815 saw great social unrest[41] as the end of the French Wars[42] saw industrial and agricultural depression and high unemployment. Social attitudes to poverty began to change after 1815 and overhauls of the system were considered. The Poor Law system was criticized as distorting the free market and in 1816 a Parliamentary Select Committee looked into altering the system[43] which resulted in the Sturges-Bourne Acts being passed. By 1820, before the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act workhouses were already being built to reduce the spiraling cost of poor relief.[43] Boyer suggests several possible reasons for the gradual increase in relief given to able-bodied males: the enclosure movement, a decline in industries such as wool spinning and lace making.[2] Boyer also contends that farmers were able to take advantage of the poor law system to shift some of their labour costs onto the tax payer.[44]

The Royal Commission on the Poor Law

Nassau William Senior argued for greater centralization of the Poor Law system

The 1832 Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws[45] was set up following the widespread destruction and machine breaking of the Swing Riots.[46] The report was prepared by a commission of nine, including Nassau William Senior,[47] and served by Edwin Chadwick as Secretary.[48] The Royal Commission's primary concerns were with illegitimacy (or "bastardy"),[49] reflecting the influence of Malthusians, and the fear that the practices of the Old Poor Law were undermining the position of the independent labourer.[50] Two practices were of particular concern: the "roundsman" system,[51] where overseers hired out paupers as cheap labour, and the Speenhamland system, which subsidised low wages without relief.[45] The report concluded that the existing Poor Laws undermined the prosperity of the country by interfering with the natural laws of "supply and demand", that the existing means of poor relief allowed employers to force down wages, and, that poverty itself was inevitable.[52][53]

The Commission proposed the New Law be governed by two overarching principles:

  • "less eligibility": that the position of the pauper should have to enter a workhouse with conditions worse than that of the poorest 'free' labourer outside of the workhouse.[54]
  • the "workhouse test", that relief should only be available in the workhouse.[1] The reformed workhouses were to be uninviting, so that anyone capable of coping outside them would choose not to be in one.

When the Act was introduced however it had been partly watered down. The workhouse test and the idea of "less eligibility" were never mentioned themselves and the recommendation of the Royal Commission that 'outdoor relief' (relief given outside of a workhouse)[55] should be abolished – was never implemented. The report recommended separate workhouses for the aged, infirm, children, able-bodied females and able-bodied males. The report also stated that parishes should be grouped into unions in order to spread the cost of workhouses and a central authority should be established in order to enforce these measures. The Poor Law Commission set up by Earl Grey took a year to write its report,[6] the recommendations passed easily through Parliament support by both main parties the Whigs and the Tories. The bill gained Royal Assent in 1834. The few who opposed the Bill were more concerned about the centralisation which it would bring rather than the underpinning philosophy of utilitarianism.[56]

New Poor Law

The Utilitarian views of Jeremy Bentham influenced the new legislation.[57]

The Poor Law Amendment Act[58] was passed in 1834 by the government of Lord Melbourne and largely implemented the findings of the Royal Commission which had presented its findings two years earlier.[59] The New Poor Law is considered to be one of the most "far-reaching pieces of legislation of the entire Nineteenth Century"[3] and "classic example of the fundamental Whig-Benthamite reforming legislation of the period".[59] The Act aimed to reduce the burden on rate payers and can be seen as an attempt by the Whig government to win the votes of the classes enfranchised by the Second Reform Act. Despite being labeled an "amendment act" it completely overhauled the existing system[43] and established a Poor Law Commission to oversee the national operation of the system.[60] This included the forming together of small parishes into Poor Law Unions[61] and the building of workhouses in each union for the giving of poor relief. Although the aim of the legislation was to reduce costs to rate payers, one area not reformed was the method of financing of the Poor Law system which continued to be paid for by levying a "poor rate"[62][63] on the property owning middle classes.

Despite efforts to ban outdoor relief parishes continued to offer it as a more cost effective method of dealing with pauperism. The Outdoor Labour Test Order[64] and Outdoor Relief Prohibitory Order[65] were both issued in order to try and prevent people receiving relief outside of the workhouse. Despite these later edicts it is notable that the Poor Law Amendment Act did not ban all forms of outdoor relief.[66] When the new Amendment was applied to the industrial North of England (an area the law had never considered during reviews), the system failed catastrophically as many found themselves temporarily unemployed, due to recessions or a fall in stock demands, so called 'cyclical unemployment' and were reluctant to enter a Workhouse, despite it being the only method of gaining aid. The abuses and shortcomings of the system are documented in the novels of Charles Dickens and Frances Trollope. Despite the aspirations of the reformers, the New Poor Law was unable to make the Workhouse as bad as life outside. The primary problem was that in order to make the diet of the Workhouse inmates "less eligible" than what they could expect outside, it would be necessary to starve the inmates beyond an acceptable level.[54] It was for this reason that other ways were found to deter entrance to the Workhouses. These measures ranged from the introduction of prison style uniforms to the segregation of 'inmates' into yards – there were normally male, female, boy and girls yards.

The Act stated that no able-bodied person was to receive money or other help from the Poor Law authorities except in a workhouse. Conditions were to be made harsh to discourage people from claiming. Workhouses were to be built in every parish and if parishes were to small parishes to group together to form Workhouse Unions. The Poor Law Commissioners were to be responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Act. For various reasons it was impossible to apply some of the terms of the Act. Less eligibility was in some cases impossible without starving paupers and the high cost of building workhouses incurred by rate payers meant that outdoor relief continued to be a popular alternative. Nottingham was allowed an exemption from the law and continued to provide outdoor relief[67]

In 1846, the Andover workhouse scandal,[68] where conditions in the Andover Union Workhouse were found to be inhumane and dangerous, prompted a government review and the abolition of the Poor Law Commission which was replaced with a Poor Law Board which meant that a Committee of Parliament was to administer the Poor Law, with a cabinet minister as head. Despite this another scandal occurred over inhumane treatment of paupers in the Huddersfield workhouse.[69]

After the New Poor Law

Infighting between Edwin Chadwick and other Poor Law Commissioners was one reason for an overhaul of Poor Law administration.

After 1847 the Poor Law Commission was replaced with a Poor Law Board.[5] This was because of the Andover workhouse scandal and the criticism of Henry Parker who was responsible for the Andover union as well as the tensions in Somerset House caused by Chadwick's failure to become a Poor Law Commissioner. The Poor Law had been altered in 1834 because of increasing costs. The Workhouse Visiting Society which formed in 1858 highlighted conditions in workhouses[70] and led to workhouses being expected more often.[71] The Union Chargeability Act was passed in 1865[72] in order to make the financial burden of pauperism be placed upon the whole unions rather than individual parishes. Most Boards of Guardians were middle class and committed to keeping Poor Rates as low as possible. After the Reform Act 1867 there was increasing welfare legislation. As this legislation required local authorities' support the Poor Law Board was replaced with a Local Government Board in 1871.[73] The Local Government Board led a crusade against outdoor relief supported by the Charity Organisation Society, an organization which viewed outdoor relief as destroying the self-reliance of the poor.[2] The effect of this renewed effect to deter outdoor relief was to reduce claimants by a third and to increase numbers in the work house by 12–15%.[2] County Councils were formed in 1888, District Councils in 1894. This meant that public housing, unlike health and income maintenance, developed outside the scope of the Poor Law. Poor Law policy after the New Poor Law concerning the elderly, the sick and mentally ill and children became more humane.[74] This was in part due to the expense of providing "mixed workhouses"[74] as well as changing attitudes regarding the causes and nature of poverty.[75]

Decline and abolition

The Liberal welfare reforms were implemented outside of the Poor Law system and paved the way for the eventual abolition of the Poor Law.

The Poor Law system began to decline with the availability of other forms of assistance. The growth of friendly societies provided help for its members without recourse to the Poor Law system. Some trade unions also provided help for their members. The Medical Relief Disqualification Removal Act 1885 meant that people who had accessed medical care funded by the poor rate were no longer disqualified from voting in elections. In 1886 the Chamberlain Circular encouraged the Local Government Board to set up work projects when unemployment rates were high rather than use workhouses. In 1905 the Conservatives passed the Unemployed Workman Act which provided for temporary employment for workers in times of unemployment.[76]

In 1905 a Royal Commission was set up to investigate what changes could be made to the Poor Law.[77] The Commission produced two conflicting reports and both investigations were largely ignored the Liberal government when implementing their own scheme of welfare legislation. The welfare reforms of the Liberal Government[78] made several provisions to provide social services without the stigma of the Poor Law, including Old age pensions and National Insurance, and from that period fewer people were covered by the system.[79] From 1911, the term "Workhouse" was replaced by "Poor Law Institution".[80] Means tests were developed during the inter-war period, not as part of the Poor Law, but as part of the attempt to offer relief that was not affected by the stigma of pauperism. According to Lees by slowly dismantling the system the Poor Law was "to die by attrition and surgical removals of essential organs".[81]

During the First World War there is evidence that some workhouses were used as makeshift hospitals for wounded servicemen.[82][83][84] Numbers using the Poor Law system increased during the interwar years and between 1921–38 despite the extension of unemployment insurance to virtually all workers except the self-employed.[85] Many of these workers ere provided with outdoor relief. One aspect of the Poor Law that continued to cause resentment was that the burden of poor relief was not shared equally by rich and poor areas but, rather, fell most heavily on those areas in which poverty was at its worst. This was a central issue in the Poplar Rates Rebellion led by George Lansbury and others in 1921.[86] Lansbury had in 1911 written a provocative attack on the workhouse system in a pamphlet entitled "Smash Up the Workhouse!".[87]

Poverty in the interwar years (1918–1939) was responsible for several measures which largely killed off the Poor Law system. The Board of Guardians (Default) Act 1926 was passed in response to some Boards of Guardians supporting the Miners during the General Strike.[88] Workhouses were officially abolished by the Local Government Act 1929,[89] and between 1929–1930 Poor Law Guardians, the "workhouse test" and the term "pauper" disappeared.The Unemployment Assistance Board was set up in 1934 to deal with those not covered by the earlier 1911 National Insurance Act passed by the Liberals and by 1937 the able-bodied poor had been absorbed into this scheme. By 1936 only 13% of people were still receiving poor relief in some form of institution.[90] In 1948 the Poor Law system was finally abolished with the introduction of the modern welfare state and the passing of the National Assistance Act.[1] The National Health Service Act 1946 came into force in 1948 and created the modern day National Health Service.[91]

Opposition to the Poor Laws

Punch criticized the New Poor Law's workhouses for splitting mothers and their infant children

Opposition to the Poor Law grew at the beginning of the 19th century. The 1601 system was felt to be too costly[27] and was considered in academic circles as encouraging the underlying problems.[92] Jeremy Bentham argued for a disciplinary, punitive approach to social problems, whilst the writings of Thomas Malthus focused attention on the problem of overpopulation, and the growth of illegitimacy.[93] David Ricardo argued that there was an "iron law of wages". The effect of poor relief, in the view of the reformers, was to undermine the position of the "independent labourer".[94]

In the period following the Napoleonic Wars, several reformers altered the function of the "poorhouse" into the model for a deterrent workhouse. The first of the deterrent workhouses in this period was at Bingham, Nottinghamshire. The second was Becher's workhouse in Southwell, now maintained by the National Trust. George Nicholls, the overseer at Southwell, was to become a Poor Law Commissioner in the reformed system. The 1817 Report of the Select Committee on the Poor Laws condemned the Poor Law as causing poverty itself.[95]

The introduction of the New Poor Law also resulted in opposition. Some who gave evidence to the Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws suggested that the existing system had proved adequate and was more adaptable to local needs.[96] This argument was strongest in the industrial North of England and in the textile industries[27] where outdoor relief was a more effective method of dealing with cyclical unemployment as well as being a more cost effective method. Poor Law commissioners faced greatest opposition in Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire where in 1837 there was high unemployment during an economic depression. The New Poor Law was seen as interference from Londoners with little understanding of local affairs.[97] Opposition was unusually strong because committees had already been formed in opposition to the Ten Hours Movement,[98] leaders of the Ten Hours campaign such as Richard Oastler,[99][100] Joseph Rayner Stephens[101] and John Fielden[102] became the leaders of the Anti-Poor Law campaign. The Book of Murder was published and was aimed at creating opposition to the workhouse system.[103] and pamphlets were published spreading rumour and propaganda about Poor Law Commissioners and alleged infanticide inside of workhouses.[104] Opposition to the Poor Law yielded some successes in delaying the development of workhouses, and one workhouse in Stockport was attacked by a crowd of rioters.[105] As many Boards of Guardians were determined to continue under the old system, the Poor Law Commission granted some boards the right to continue providing relief under the Old Poor Law. However, the movement against the New Poor Law was short-lived, leading many to instead turn towards Chartism.[97]

Scotland and Ireland

The Poor Law systems of Scotland and Ireland were distinct from the English Poor Law system covering England and Wales although Irish legislation was heavily influenced by the English Poor Law Amendment Act.[106] In Scotland the Poor Law system was reformed by the 1845 Scottish Poor Law Act.[107] In Ireland the Irish Poor Law Act of 1838 was the first attempt to put control of the destitute and responsibility for their welfare on a statutory basis.[108] Due to exceptional overcrowding, workhouses in Ireland stopped admissions during the Irish Potato famine and increasingly resorted to outdoor relief.[109] Emigration was sometimes used by landlords as a method of keeping the cost of poor relief down and removing surplus labour.[109] Reforms after the Irish War of Independence resulted in the abolition of Boards of Guardians in the jurisdiction of the Irish Free State and their replacement by County Boards of Health.[110]


The historiography of the Poor Laws has passed through several distinct phases.[111] The "traditionalist" or "orthodox" account of the Poor Laws focuses upon the deficiencies of the Old Poor Law.[112] This early historiography was influential in successfully overhauling the system. Blaug presents the first revisionist analysis of the Poor Law in “The Myth of the Old Poor Law and the making of the New” arguing that the Old Poor Law did not reduce the efficiency of agricultural workers, lower wages, depress rents or compound the burden on rate payers.[113] Instead Blaug argues that Old Poor Law was a device "for dealing with the problems of structural unemployment and substandard wages in the lagging rural sector of a rapidly growing but still underdeveloped economy".[113] Other areas of Poor Law historiography which have concerned historians include the extent to which the Second Great Reform Act contributed to the Poor Law Amendment Act[114] and the extend to which outdoor relief was abolished following the New Poor Law.[115]

See also

Further reading


  1. ^ a b c d "British social policy 1601–1948". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  2. ^ a b c d e f g "Encyclopedia: English Poor Laws". 2002-05-07. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  3. ^ a b c "The Poor Law: overview". 2002-11-08. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  4. ^ GR Elton, An Early Tudor Poor Law, Economic History Review, 1953
  5. ^ a b "The Poor Law". 2007-08-06. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  6. ^ a b "1834 Poor Law". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  7. ^ a b Peter Higginbotham. "The Workhouse Web Site". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  8. ^ "The New Poor Law – 1834 – Britain". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  9. ^ a b "Encyclopedia: English Poor Laws". 2002-05-07. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  10. ^ Lees, Lynn Hollen. The Solidarities of Strangers: The English Poor Laws and the People, 1770–1948. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998
  11. ^ "Five Hundred Years of English Poor Laws, 1349–1834:Regulating the Working and Nonworking Poor" (PDF). Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  12. ^ a b
  13. ^ a b Cartwright, Frederick F. 1991. Disease and History. New York: Barnes & Noble. pp. 32–46.
  14. ^ a b was the Economy Like After the Black Death? The Plague and England, Cardiff University. Retrieved on April 11, 2009.
  15. ^ BBC History, social effects of the plague
  16. ^ Byrne,Joseph Patrick, The black death, p66
  17. ^ a b "The 1601 Elizabethan Poor Law". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  18. ^ "Poor Law Origins". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  19. ^ "Sturdy Beggars". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  20. ^ "Statues of labourers". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  21. ^ "Poor Tudors". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  22. ^ R. O. Bucholz, Newton Key, Early modern England, 1485–1714, p176
  23. ^ Slack, Paul. The English Poor Law, 1531–1782. London: Macmillan, 1990.
  24. ^ "The Poor Law". 2007-05-17. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  25. ^ "Regions & Districts". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  26. ^
  27. ^ a b c d e "The Old Poor Law 1795-1834". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  28. ^ "A Short Explanation of the English Poor Law". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  29. ^ "The 1601 Elizabethan Poor Law". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  30. ^ "Parishes in southern Yorkshire". 2002-11-01. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  31. ^ a b "Justifying the relief of poverty". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  32. ^ "Population Growth in the Age of Peel". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  33. ^ "The 1662 Settlement Act". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  34. ^ "Key dates in Poor Law and Relief Great Britain 1300 – 1899". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  35. ^ Knott, John, Popular opposition to the 1834 Poor Law, p21
  36. ^ "History of St Peter's Hospital, Bristol". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  37. ^ "Edward REYNOLDS". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  38. ^ "Gilbert's Act (1782)". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  39. ^ "Lord Liverpool". 2002-03-04. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  40. ^ "The Corn Laws". 2002-10-11. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  41. ^ "Causes of the Discontent and Distress, 1812–22". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  42. ^ "The Battle of Waterloo: 18 June 1815". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  43. ^ a b c "Changing attitudes towards poverty after 1815". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  44. ^ Boyer, George R. An Economic History of the English Poor Law, 1750–1850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
  45. ^ a b "The 1832 Royal Commission of Inquiry into the operation of the Poor Laws". 2002-11-08. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  46. ^ "Rural Unrest in the 1830s: the "Swing" riots". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  47. ^ "Nassau William Senior". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  48. ^ "Edwin Chadwick". 2002-10-14. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  49. ^ "Poor Law Commissioners Report of 1834 | Library of Economics and Liberty". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  50. ^ "The burdens and evils associated with the existing Poor Laws". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  51. ^ "The Speenhamland System". 2002-11-07. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  52. ^ "The 1832 Royal Commission of Inquiry into the operation of the Poor Laws". 2002-11-08. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  53. ^ "Principles of a sound system of Poor Relief". 2002-08-22. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  54. ^ a b "'Less eligibility'". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  55. ^ "The New Poor Law, 14 August 1834". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  56. ^ Rees, Rosmary, Poverty and Public Health 1815–1948, p30
  57. ^ A. L. Dakyns, ,Bentham's Influence in Municipal and Poor Law Reform, Public Administration Volume 13 Issue 1, Pages 44 – 50, Published Online: 3 April 2007
  58. ^ "The Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  59. ^ a b "The Poor Law Amendment Act: 14 August 1834". 2002-09-23. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  60. ^ "The Poor Law Commission". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  61. ^ "Administrative Units Typology | Status definition: Poor Law Union". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  62. ^ "1834 Poor Law". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  63. ^ "Savings on the poor rates made by the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act". 2002-09-17. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  64. ^ Peter Higginbotham. "The Workhouse Web Site". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  65. ^ Williams, Karel, From Pauperism to Poverty, p64, ISBN 0710006985
  66. ^ "The National Archives Learning Curve | Victorian Britain | Caring Nation". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  67. ^ "Unemployment in Nottingham (1837–8)". 2002-11-07. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  68. ^ "The Andover Workhouse scandal, 1845-6". 2002-11-12. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  69. ^ "The Huddersfield workhouse scandal: 1848". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  70. ^ "The workhouse". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  71. ^ Margaret Anne Crowther, The workhouse system, 1834–1929: the history of an English social institution, p69
  72. ^ "William Morris: Life and Times". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  73. ^ "The collection of Local Government Board held at the British Library of Political and Economic Science". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  74. ^ a b
  75. ^ Rees, Rosmary, Poverty and Public Health, 1815–1948, p8
  76. ^ "Britain 1906–18 | Gallery 2 | Timeline". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  77. ^ Englander, D., Poverty and Poor Law Reform in 19th Century Britain, 1834–1914, (1998)
  78. ^ "GCSE Bitesize – The Liberal reforms 1906–1914". BBC. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  79. ^ "The National Archives Learning Curve | Britain 1906–18 | Achievements of Liberal Reforms: Gallery Background". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  80. ^
  81. ^ Lees, Lynn Hollen. The Solidarities of Strangers: The English Poor Laws and the People, 1770–1948. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
  82. ^ "Ss Mary & John Churchyard::the workhouse". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  83. ^
  84. ^ Peter Higginbotham. "The Workhouse Web Site". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  85. ^ "Encyclopedia: English Poor Laws". 2002-05-07. Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  86. ^ "George Lansbury: at the heart of Old Labour by John Shepherd – Reviews, Books". The Independent. 2002-11-26. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  87. ^ Crowther, M.A., The workhouse system, 1834–1929
  88. ^ Keith D. Ewing, The right to strike, p93
  89. ^ M. A. Crowther, The workhouse system 1834–1929, ISBN 0416360904
  90. ^ "The Poor Law:". 2008-11-30. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  91. ^ Jones, Kathleen, The making of social policy in Britain, p122
  92. ^ "Social Science and the 1834 Poor Law: The Theories that Smith, Bentham, Malthus and Owen made Law". Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  93. ^ Huzel, James, Malthus, the Poor Law, and Population in Early Nineteenth-Century England, University of Kent, The Economic History Review Volume 22 Issue 3, Pages 430 – 452, Published Online: 11 February 2008
  94. ^ "Principles of a sound system of Poor Relief". 2009-07-04. Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  95. ^ Boyer, George, An economic history of the English poor law, 1750–1850, p58, ISBN 0521364795
  96. ^ "'The Good Old System'". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  97. ^ a b "The Anti-Poor Law Movement". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  98. ^ "The Factory Question". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  99. ^ "Richard Oastler's opposition to the Poor Law Amendment Act". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  100. ^ "The state of the Huddersfield Union (April 1838)". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  101. ^ "Joseph Rayner Stephens". Retrieved 2009-07-22. 
  102. ^ Knott, J, Popular Opposition to the 1834 Poor Law, p95, ISBN 0709915322
  103. ^ "Book of Murder". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  104. ^ "Printed attacks on the Poor Law Amendment Act". 2009-01-19. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  105. ^ "Attack on the Workhouse at Stockport (1842 Riots)". 2006-10-05. Retrieved 2009-05-17. 
  106. ^ "Research: Guide to the records of the Poor Law". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  107. ^ "History – Beneath the Surface: A Country of Two Nations". BBC. 2001-01-01. Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  108. ^ "Ennistymon Union – The Poor Law Act". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  109. ^ a b "The Irish poor law | Public Record Office of Northern Ireland". 2009-07-21. Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  110. ^ Peter Higginbotham. "The Workhouse Web Site". Retrieved 2009-08-18. 
  111. ^ Boyer, George, An economic history of the English poor law, 1750–1850, Chapter 2
  112. ^ Boyer, George, An economic history of the English poor law, 1750–1850, p51
  113. ^ a b See Blaug, Mark, The Poor Law Report Reexamined, The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Jun., 1964), pp. 229–245.
  114. ^ Rees, Rosmary, Poverty and Public Health, 1815–1948, p33
  115. ^ Rose, Michael E. The English Poor Law, 1780–1930. Newton Abbot: David & Charles, 1971.

External links

1911 encyclopedia

Up to date as of January 14, 2010

From LoveToKnow 1911

POOR LAW. The phrase " poor law " in English usage denotes the legislation embodying the measures taken by the state for the relief of paupers and its administration. The history of the subject and its problems generally are dealt with in the article Charity And Charities, and other information will be found in Unemployment and Vagrancy. This article will deal only with the practice in the United Kingdom as adopted after the reform of the poor law in 1834 and amended by subsequent acts. This reform was brought about mainly by the rapid increase of the poor rate at the beginning of the 19th century, showing that a change was necessary either in the poor law as it then existed or in the mode of its administration.

A commission was appointed in 1832 " to make diligent and full inquiry into the practical operation of the laws for the relief of the poor in England and Wales, and into the manner in which those laws were administered, and to report their opinion as to what beneficial alterations could be made." The commissioners reported " fully on the great abuse of the legislative provision for the poor as directed to be employed by the statute of Elizabeth," finding " that the great source of abuse was the outdoor relief afforded to the able-bodied on their own account or on that of their families, given either in kind or in money." They also reported that " great maladministration existed in the workhouses." To remedy the evils they proposed considerable alterations in the law, and the principal portion of their suggestions was embodied in the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834. By virtue of this act three commissioners were appointed (originally for five years, but subsequently continued from time to time), styled " the poor law commissioners for England and Wales," sitting as a board, and appointing assistant commissioners and other officers. The administration of relief according to the existing laws was subject to their direction and control, and to their orders and regulations for the government of workhouses and the guidance and control of guardians and vestries and the keeping and allowing of accounts and contracts, without interfering with ordinary relief in individual cases. The whole of England and Wales was divided into twenty-one districts, to each of which an assistant commissioner was appointed. The commissioners under their powers formed poor law unions by uniting parishes for general administration, and building workhouses, guardians elected by the ratepayers (or ex officio) having the general government and administration of relief. The expense was apportioned to each parish on settled principles and rules, with power, however, to treat the united parishes as one for certain purposes. Outdoor relief might be given, on the order of two justices, to poor persons wholly unable to work from old age or infirmity.

The obstacles which the act had to contend with in London chiefly arose from the confusion and perplexity of jurisdiction which existed in the one hundred and seventy parishes comprised within the city of London and the metropolitan district, some of these containing governing bodies of their own; in some the parish business was professedly managed by open vestries, in others by select vestries, and in addition to these there were elective vestries, while the majority of the large parishes were managed under local acts by boards of directors, governors and trustees. These governing bodies executed a great variety of functions besides regulating the management of the poor. The power, patronage and the indirect advantages which arose from the administration of the local funds were so great that much opposition took place when it was proposed to interfere by constituting a board to be annually chosen and freely elected by the ratepayers, on which the duty of regulating the expenditure for the relief of the poor was to depend. The general management of the poor was, however, on a somewhat better footing in London than in the country.

The act of 1834 was rather to restore the scope and intention of the statute of Elizabeth by placing its administration in the hands of responsible persons chosen by the ratepayers, and themselves controlled by the orders of a central body, than to create ,a new system of poor laws. The agents and instruments by which the administration of relief is afforded are the following. The description applies to the year 1910, but, as noticed below, the question of further reform was already to the fore, and the precise direction in which changes should go was a highly controversial matter.

The guardians of the poor regulate the cases and description of relief within the union; a certain number of guardians are elected from time to time by the ratepayers. The number was formerly determined by the central board,' by whom full directions as to the mode of election were given. In addition to those elected there were ex officio guardians, principally local magistrates. However, both these and nominated guardians were done away with by the Local Government Act 1894. The plural vote (which gave to the votes of the larger ratepayers a higher value) was also abolished; and in place of the old property qualification for the office of guardian a ratepaying or residential qualification was substituted. In urban districts the act in other respects left the board of guardians untouched, but in rural districts it inaugurated a policy of consolidating local authorities. In the rural districts the district council is practically amalgamated with the guardians, for, though each body retains a separate corporate existence, the district councillors are the guardians, and guardians as such are no longer elected. These electoral changes, extremely democratic in their character, brought akout no marked general change in poor law administration. Here and there abrupt changes of policy were made, but the difficulty of bringing general principles to bear on the administration of the law remained much as before.

The guardians hold their meetings frequently, according to the exigencies of the union. Individual cases are brought to their notice - most cases of resident poor by the relieving officer of the union; the case of casual paupers by him or by the workhouse officers by whom they were admitted in the first instance. The resident poor frequently appear in person before the guardians. The mode of voting which the guardians follow in respect to any matter they differ on is minutely regulated, and all their proceedings, as well as those of their officers, are entered in prescribed books and forms. They have a clerk, generally a local solicitor of experience, who has a variety of responsible duties in advising, conducting correspondence and keeping books of 1 After an intermediate transfer in 1847 of the powers of the poor law commissioners, and the constitution of a fresh board styled " commissioners for administering the laws for relief of the poor in England," it was found expedient to concentrate in one department of the government the supervision of the laws relating to the public health, the relief of the poor and local government; and this concentration was in 1871 carried out by the establishment (by Act of Parliament 34 & 35 Vict. c. 70) of the local government board.

accounts, and carrying out the directions of the guardians, who in their turn are subject to the general or special regulations of the local government board.

It may be mentioned here that the chief difficulty in understanding the English poor law arises from the fact that there are three authorities, each of them able to alter its administration fundamentally. The poor law is not only the creation of statutes passed by parliament; it is also controlled by the subordinate jurisdiction of the local government board, which in virtue of various acts has the power to issue orders. In a single year the local government board may issue nearly two thousand orders, over a thousand of them having special reference to the poor law. It is not possible therefore even to summarize the mass of subordinate legislation. A third source of authority is the local board of guardians, which, within the discretion allowed to it by statutes and orders, can so variously administer the law that it is difficult to understand how procedure so fundamentally different can be based on one and the same law. This elasticity, admirable or mischievous, as we choose to regard it, is the most characteristic feature of the English poor law system. The various officers of the union, from the medical officers to workhouse porters, including masters and matrons of workhouses, are generally appointed by the guardians, and the areas, duties and salaries of all the paid officers may be prescribed by the local government board.

Among a multitude of miscellaneous duties and powers of the guardians, apart from the ordinary duties of ordering or refusing relief in individual cases and superintending the officers of the union, the duties devolve on them of considering the adjustment of contributions to the common fund whether of divided or added parishes, and matters affecting other unions, the building of workhouses and raising of money for that and other purposes, the taking of land on lease, the hiring of buildings, special provisions as to superannuation and allowances to officers, the maintenance and orders as to lunatics apart from individual instances, and the consideration of questions of settlement and removal. A paramount obligation rests on the guardians to attend to the actual visitation of workhouses, schools and other institutions and places in which the poor are interested, and to call attention to and report on any irregularity or neglect of duty. Guardians may charge the rates with the expenses of attending conferences for the discussion of matters connected with their duties (Poor Law Conferences Act 1883). In relation to expenditure the guardians have very considerable but restricted powers. Their accounts are audited by district auditors appointed by the local government board.

Overseers of the poor are still appointed under the statute of Elizabeth, and the guardians cannot interfere with the ap-. pointment. As, however, the relief of the poor is administered by boards of guardians, the principal duties of overseers relate to the making and collection of rates and payments. The guardians, by order of the local government board, may appoint assistant overseers and collectors.

The conditions of persons entitled to relief are indicated by the terms of the statute of Elizabeth. If they fall within the definitions there given they have right to relief. A fundamental principle with respect to legal relief of the poor is that the condition of the pauper ought to be, on the whole, less eligible than that of the independent labourer. The pauper has no just ground for complaint, if, while his physical wants are adequately provided for, his condition is less eligible than that of the poorest class of those who contribute to his support. If a state of destitution exists, the failure of third persons to perform their duty, as a husband, or relative mentioned in the statute of Elizabeth, neglecting those he is under a legal obligation to support, is no answer to the application. The relief should be afforded, and is often a condition precedent to the right of parish officers to take proceedings against the relatives or to apply to other poor unions. The duty to give immediate relief must, however, vary with the circumstances. The case of wanderers under circumstances not admitting of delay may be different from that of persons resident on the spot where inquiry as to all the circumstances is practicable. The statute of Elizabeth contemplated that the relief was to be afforded to the poor resident in the parish, but it is contrary to the spirit of the law that any person shall be permitted to perish from starvation or want of medical assistance. Whoever is by sudden emergency or urgent distress deprived of the ordinary means of subsistence has a right to apply for immediate relief where he may happen to be. Persons comprehended within this class are called " casual poor," although the term " casuals " is generally used in reference to vagrants who take refuge for a short time in the " casual wards " of workhouses. Various tests are applied to ascertain whether applicants are really destitute. Labour tests are applied to the able-bodied, and workhouse tests are applied to those to whom entering a workhouse is made a condition of relief.

As to the nature and kind of relief given under the poor laws the great distinction restored rather than introduced by the amendment of the poor law system in 1834 was giving all relief to able-bodied persons of their of families in well-regulated workhouses (that is to Relief say, places where they may be set to work according to the spirit and intention of the statute of Elizabeth), and confining outdoor relief to the impotent - that is, all except the ablebodied and their families. Although workhouses formed a conspicuous feature in legislation for the poor from an early period, the erection of those buildings for unions throughout the country where not already provided followed immediately on the amendment of the system in 1834. Since that time there has been a constant struggle between the pauper class and the admi zistrators of the law, the former naturally wishing to be relieved at their own homes, and in many instances choosing rather to go without aid than to remove within the walls of the workhouse. Relief given in a workhouse is termed " in (or indoor) maintenance " relief, and when given at the homes of the paupers is termed " outdoor relief." Admission to a workhouse may be by a written order of the board of guardians, or by the master or matron (or in their absence by the porter) without an order in any case of sudden or urgent necessity, or provisionally by a relieving officer, or overseer or churchwarden. Any person who Ru es. is brought by a policeman as having been found wandering in a state of destitution may be admitted. It is to be observed generally, with respect to all persons who may apply for admission into the workhouse under circumstances of urgent necessity, that their destitution, coupled with the fact of being within the union or parish, entitles them to relief, altogether independently of their settlement, if they have one, which is a matter for subsequent inquiry.

The regulations for the government of workhouses fall under two classes: (t) those which are necessary for the maintenance of good order in any building in which considerable numbers of persons of both sexes and of different ages reside; (2) those which are necessary in order that these establishments may not be almshouses, but workhouses in the proper meaning of the term.

The inmates of a workhouse are necessarily separated into certain classes. In no well-managed institution of this sort, in any country, are males and females, the old and the young, the healthy and the sick, indiscriminately mixed together. Guardians are required to divide the paupers into certain classes, and to subdivide any one or more of these classes in any manner which may be advisable, and which the internal arrangements of the workhouse admit; and the guardians are required from time to time, after consulting the medical officer, to make necessary arrangements with regard to persons labouring under any disease of body or mind, and, so far as circumstances permit, to subdivide any of the enumerated classes with reference to the moral character of behaviour or the previous habits of the inmates, or to such other grounds as may seem expedient.

The separation of married couples was long a vexed question, the evils on the one hand arising from the former unrestricted practice being very great, while on the other hand the separation of old couples was felt as a great hardship, and by express statutory provision in 1847 husband and wife, both being above the age of sixty, received into a workhouse cannot be compelled to live separate and apart from each other (to & t 1 Vict. c. 109, § 23). This exemption was carried somewhat further by contemporaneous orders of the board, under which guardians were not compelled to separate infirm couples, provided they had a sleeping apartment separate from that of other paupers; and in 1876 guardians were empowered, at their discretion, to permit husband and wife where either of them is infirm, sick or disabled by any injury, or above sixty years of age to live together, but every such case must be reported to the local government board (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, § to). The classification of children apart from adult paupers is peremptory. Even in those unions where what is called a workhouse school is maintained the children are kept in detached parts of the building, and do not associate with the adult paupers. The separate school is built on a separate and often distant site. Sometimes the separate school is one building, sometimes detached " blocks," and sometimes a group of cottage homes. There still remain ten district schools. In some places an experiment which is called the scattered homes system has been adopted. This consists in lodging-homes for the children placed in different parts of the town, from which the children attend the local public elementary schools. In the rural districts and in less populous unions the children generally attend the local public elementary school. To these expedients boarding-out must be added. The above refers of course only to those children who as inmates are under the charge of the guardians. Outdoor paupers are responsible for the education of their children, but guardians cannot legally continue outdoor relief if the children are not sent regularly to school.

The tendency too has been to improve administrative methods with reference to children.

Two important orders on the subject of the boarding-out of poorlaw children were issued in 1889. By the Boarding of Children in Unions Order, orphan and deserted children can be boarded out with suitable foster-parents in the union by all boards of guardians except those in the metropolis. This can be done either through a voluntary committee or directly. By the Boarding Out Order, orphan and deserted children may be boarded out by all boards of guardians without the limits of their own unions, but in all cases this must be done through the offices of properly constituted local boarding-out committees. The sum payable to the foster-parents is not to exceed 4s. per week for each child. The local committee require to be approved by the Local Government Board.

The question of the education of poor law children was much discussed in later years. During the early years of the central authority, it was the object of the commissioners to induce boards of guardians to unite in districts for educational purposes. This was advocated on grounds of efficiency and economy. It was very unpopular with the local authorities, and the number of such districts has never exceeded a dozen. In London, where this aggregation was certainly less desirable than in rural unions, several districts were formed and large district schools were built. Adverse criticism, by Mrs Nassau Senior in 1874, and by a department committee appointed twenty years later, was directed against these large, or, as they are invidiously called, barrack schools. The justice of this condemnation has been disputed, but it seems probable that some of these schools had grown too large. Many of these have been dissolved by order of the local government board on the application of the unions concerned. This condemnation of some schools has in certain quarters been extended to all schools, and is construed by others as an unqualified recommendation of boarding out, a method of bringing up poor law children obviously requiring even more careful supervision than is needed in the publicity of a school.

Other acts to be noted are the Poor Law Act 1889 and the Custody of Children Act 1891, § 3. The evil of allowing children who have been reputably brought up in poor law schools to relapse into vicious habits on return to the custody of unworthy parents has been the subject of frequent remark. By the act of 1889, guardians are authorized to detain children who are under their charge, as having been deserted by their parents, up to the age of 16 if boys and of 18 if girls. By the Poor Law Act 1899 the principle is extended to orphans and the children of bad parents chargeable to the rates. The act of 1891 goes further, and enacts that where a parent has (a) abandoned or deserted his child, or (b) allowed his child to be brought up by another person at that person's expense, or by the guardians of a poor law union for such a length of time and in such circumstances as to satisfy the court that the parent was unmindful of his parental duties, the court shall not make an order for the delivery of the child to the parent unless the parent has satisfied the court that, having regard to the welfare of the child, he is a fit person to have the custody of the child.

Casual and poor wayfarers admitted by the master and matron are kept in a separate ward and dieted and set to work in such manner as the guardians by resolution direct; and whenever any vagrants or mendicants are received into a workhouse they are usually (as a precaution necessary for preventing the introduction of infectious or contagious diseases) kept entirely separate from the other inmates, unless their stay exceeds a single night.

For the guidance of guardians an important circular was issued from the local government board on the 15th of March 1886. It stated that while " the board have no doubt that the powers which the guardians possess are fully sufficient to enable them to deal with ordinary pauperism, and to meet the demand for relief from the classes who usually seek it," yet " these provisions do not in all cases meet the emergency. What is required to relieve artisans and others who have hitherto avoided poor law assistance, and who are temporarily deprived of employment, is - (1) Work which will not involve the stigma of pauperism; (2) work which all can perform, whatever may have been their previous occupations; (3) work which does not compete with that of other labourers at present in employment; and lastly, work which is not likely to interfere with the resumption of regular employment in their own trades by those who seek it." The circular went on to recommend that guardians should confer with the local authorities, " and endeavour to arrange with the latter for the execution of works on which unskilled labour may be immediately employed." The conditions of such work were (I) the men to be employed must be recommended by the guardians; (2) the wages must be less than the wages ordinarily paid for such work.

The circular was widely distributed. Many boards that were inclined in that direction regarded it as an encouragement to open or to promote the opening of relief works. Others, again, looked closely at the conditions, and declared roundly that it was impossible to fulfil them. A poor law authority, they said, cannot give relief which will not subject the recipients to the legal (if any) and economic disabilities attaching to the receipt of poor law relief. Work which all can perform can only be found in the shape of task-work under adequate supervision. If the work is of a useful and necessary character, it must compete with the labour of others belonging to the trades affected. If the relief works are opened by authorities other than the poor law guardians, the conditions that the men were only to be employed when recommended by the guardians, and then paid less than the current rate of wages, were calculated, it was urged, to secure bad work, discontent, and all the " stigma of pauperism." The ambiguity of the circular indeed was such, that both action and inaction seem amply justified by it.

In the administration of medical relief to the sick, the objects kept in view are: (1) to provide medical aid for persons who are really destitute, and (2) to prevent medical relief from medi ca l generating or encouraging pauperism, and with this Relief. view to withdraw from the labouring classes, as well as from the administrators of relief and the medical officers, all motives for applying for or administering medical relief, unless where the circumstances render it absolutely necessary.

Unions are formed into medical districts limited in area and population, to which a paid medical officer is appointed, who is furnished with a list of all such aged and infirm persons and persons permanently sick or disabled as are actually receiving relief and residing within the medical officer's district. Every person named in the list receives a ticket, and on exhibiting it to the medical officer is entitled to advice, attendance and medicine as his case may require. Medical outdoor relief in connexion with dispensaries is regulated in asylum districts of the metropolis by the Metropolitan Poor Act 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 6). In connexion with medical relief must be noted the Medical Relief Disqualification Removal Act 1885. This act relieved voters from disqualification which would otherwise attach in consequence of the receipt by them or their families of medical or surgical assistance, or of medicine, at the expense of the poor rate. This does not apply to guardian elections, and it does not include persons who, in addition to medical relief, receive nourishment or other relief from the poor rate. The provisions which require the removal of the names of paupers from the electoral roll are, it is understood, very perfunctorily carried out. The Outdoor Relief Friendly Societies Act 1894 authorized guardians, in calculating the proper allowance to be made, to disregard an income derived from a friendly society, and to give relief as if the applicant in receipt of such an allowance was wholly destitute. This act is a curious illustration of the English poor law system. In earlier years, notably in what is known as Paget's letter (22nd Rep. Poor Law Board, p. 108), the central board, had, in answer to inquiry, pointed out that such preferential treatment given to men receiving benefit, insufficient to maintain them, from a friendly society, could not in equity be withheld from persons in receipt of an adequate benefit, or from those whose savings took the form of a deposit in a bank, of a share in a co-operative society, or of cottage property; and further, that an engagement on the part of guardians to supplement insufficient allowance from a friendly society was a bounty on inadequate and insolvent friendly society finance. The central board went so far as to say that relief given in such disregard of the pauper's income was illegal. They had, however, issued no peremptory order on the subject, nor had guardians been surcharged for neglect of the rule. The local authorities followed their own discretion, and a very general practice was to reckon friendly society allowances at half their value. The above act set aside the central board's earlier interpretation of the law. It made, however, no attempt to enforce its procedure on the numerous boards of guardians who regard the course thereby authorized as contrary to` public policy.

A lunatic asylum is required to be provided by a county or borough for the reception of pauper lunatics, with a committee of visitors who, among other duties, fix a weekly sum to be charged for the lodging, maintenance, medicine and clothing of each pauper lunatic confined in such asylum. Several acts were passed. The Lunacy Act 1890 consolidated the acts affecting lunatics. It was further amended by the Lunacy Act 1891.

An explanatory letter issued by the local government board will be found in the 20th Annual Report, p. 23. The tendency of this and of all recent legislation for an afflicted class has been to increase the care and the safeguards for their proper treatment.

A settlement is the right acquired in any one of the modes pointed out by the poor laws to become a recipient of the benefit of those laws in that parish or place where the right has been last acquired.

No relief is given from the poor rates of a parish to any person who does not reside within the union, except where such person being casually within a parish becomes destitute by sudden distress, or where such person is entitled to

receive relief from any parish where non-resident under justice's order (applicable to persons under orders of removal and to non-resident lunatics), and except to widows and legitimate children where the widow was resident with her husband at the time of his death out of the union in which she was not settled, or where a child under sixteen is maintained in a workhouse or establishment for the education of pauper children not situate in the union, and in some other exceptional cases.

Immediately before the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 settlements were acquired by birth, hiring and service, apprenticeship, renting a tenement, estate, office or payment of rates. In addition to these an acknowledgment (by certificate), by relief or acts of acquiescence) has practically the effect of a settlement, for, if unexplained, such an acknowledgment stops the parish from disputing a settlement in the parish acknowledging. The Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 abolished settlement by hiring and service (or by residence under it) and by serving an office, and by apprenticeship in the sea service. Moreover the guardians of a union might agree (subject to the approval of the commissioners) that all the parishes forming it should for the purposes of settle - ment be considered as one parish.

It is to be observed that, for the purposes of relief, settlement and removal and burial, the workhouse of any parish is considered as situated in the parish to which each poor person is chargeable.

There may be a settlement by parentage, for legitimate children take the settlement of their father, or if he has no settlement they are entitled to the settlement of their mother; and it is only when both these sources fail discovery that their right of settlement by birth accrues; for until the settlement of the father or mother has been ascertained the settlement of a legitimate child, like that of a bastard, is in the place where the birth took place.

A settlement attaches to those persons who have a settlement of some kind. Foreigners born out of the country.and not acquiring any in one of the modes pointed out must be provided for, if requiring relief, where they happen to be.

As the burden of maintaining the poor is thrown on the parish of settlement, when the necessity for immediate relief arises in another parish, the important question arises whether the pauper can be removed; for, although the parish where the pauper happens to be must afford immediate relief without waiting for removal, the parish of settlement cannot in general be charged with the cost unless the pauper is capable of being removed. The question of removability is distinct from settlement. A pauper often acquires a status or irremovability without gaining a settlement.

Irremovability is a principle of great public importance quite irrespective of the incident of cost as between one parish or another. Before the introduction of a status of irremovability removal might take place (subject to powers of suspension in case of sickness and otherwise) after any interval during which no legal settlement was obtained; mere length of residence without concurrent cir - cumstances involving the acquisition of a settlement on obtaining relief gave no right to a person to remain in the parish where he resided.

In 1846 it was enacted that no person should be removed nor any warrant granted for the removal of any person from any parish in which such persons had resided for five years (9 & 10 Vict. c. 66). In 1861 three years was submitted for five (24 & 25 Vict. C. 55); and only four years later one year was substituted for three (28 & 29 Vict. C. 79). Apart from these reductions of time in giving the status of irremovability, actual removals to the parish of settlement were narrowed by provisions giving to residence in any part of a union the same effect as a residence in any parish of that union (24 & 25 Vict. c. 55). On the other hand the time during which parish relief is received, or during which the person is in any poorhouse or hospital or in a prison, is excluded from the computa - tion of time (9 & 10 Vict. c. 66).

The removability as well as the settlement of the family, i.e. of the wife and unemancipated children, are practically subject to one and the same general rule. Wherever any person has a wife or children having another settlement, they are removable where he is removable, and are not removable from any parish or place from which he is not removable (11 & 12 Vict. c. 211).

It is to be borne in mind that no person exempted from liability to be removed acquires, by reason of such exemption, any settle - ment in any parish; but a residence for three years gives a qualified settlement (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61).

The cost of relief of paupers rendered irremovable is borne by the common fund of the union (11 & 12 Vict. c. 110, § 3) as union expenses (§ 6), and any question arising in the union with reference to the charging relief may be referred to and decided by the local govern - ment board (§ 4).

The poor rate is the fund from which the cost of relief is princi - pally derived. The statute of Elizabeth (extended in some respects as to places by 13 & 14 Charles II. c. 12) embraced two classes of persons subject to taxation - occupiers of real property and inhabitants in respect of personal property, although the rateability under the latter head was reluctantly conceded by the courts of law, and was in practice only partially acted upon.

As regards occupiers of land and houses, the correct principles as to the persons liable to be rated were, after many erroneous views and decisions, established by the House of Lords in 1865 in the case of the Mersey docks. The only occupier exempt from the operation of the act of Elizabeth is the Crown, on the general principle that such liabilities are not imposed on the sovereign unless expressly mentioned, and that principle applies to the direct and immediate servants of the Crown, whose occupation is the occupation of the Crown itself. If there is a personal private beneficial occupation, so that the occupation is by the subject, that occupa - tion is rateable. Thus for apartments in a royal palace, gratui - tously assigned to a subject, who occupies them by permission of the sovereign but for the subject's benefit, the latter is rateable; on the other hand, where a lease of private property is taken in the name of a subject, but the occupation is by the sovereign or his subjects on his behalf, no rate can be imposed.

So far the ground of exemption is perfectly intelligible, but it has been carried a good deal further, and applied to many cases in which it can scarcely be said naturally, but only theoretically, that the sovereign or the servants of the sovereign are in occupation. A long series of cases have established that when property is occu - pied for the purposes of the government of the country, including under that head the police, and the administration of justice, no one is rateable in respect of such occupation. And this applies not only to property occupied for such purposes by the servants of the great departments of state and the post office, the Horse Guards, and the Adrniralty, in all which cases the occupiers might strictly be called the servants of the Crown, but to county buildings occupied for the assizes and for the judge's lodgings, to stations for the local constabulary, to jails and to county courts where undertakings are carried out by or for the government and the government is in occupation; the same principles of exemption have been applied to property held by the office of works.

When the property is not de facto occupied by the Crown or for the Crown, it is rateable; and, although formerly the uses of property for public purposes, even where the Crown was not constructively interested in the way above pointed out, was treated as a ground for exemption, it is now settled that trustees who are in law the tenants and occupiers of valuable property in trust for public and even charitable purposes, such as hospitals or lunatic asylums, are in principle rateable notwithstanding that the buildings are actually occupied by paupers who are sick or insane, and that the notion that persons in the legal occupation of valuable property are not rateable if they occupy in a merely fiduciary character cannot be sustained.

With respect to the particular person to be rated where there is a rateable occupation, it is to be observed that the tenant, as dis - tinguished from the landlord, is the person to be rated under the statute of Elizabeth; but occupiers of tenements let for short terms may deduct the poor rate paid by them from their rents, or the vestries may order such owners to be rated instead of the occupiers; such payments or deductions do not affect qualification and fran - chises depending on rating (Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act 1869 and Amendment Act 1882).

To be rated the occupation must be such as to be of value, and in this sense the word beneficial occupation has been used in many cases. But it is not necessary that the occupation should be bene - ficial to the occupier; for, if that were necessary, trustees occupying for various purposes, having no beneficial occupation, would not be liable, and their general liability has been established as indicated in the examples just given.

As to the mode and amount of rating it is no exaggeration to say that the application of a landlord-and-tenant valuation in the terms already given in the Parochial Assessment Act, with the deductions there mentioned, has given rise to litigation on which millions of pounds have been spent with respect to the rating of railways alone, although the established principle applied to them, after much consideration, is to calculate the value of the land as increased by the line.

The Parochial Assessment Act referred to (6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 96), comprising various provisions as to the mode of assessing the rate so far as it authorized the making of a valuation, was repealed in 1869, in relation to the metropolis, and other provisions made for securing uniformity of the assessment of rateable property there (3 2 & 33 Vict. c. 67).

The mode in which a rate is made and recovered may be concisely stated thus. The guardians appoint an assessment committee of their body for the investigation and supervision of valuations, which are made out in the first instance by the overseers according to specific regulations and in a form showing among other headings the gross estimated rental of all property and the names of occupiers and owners, and the rateable value after the deductions specified in the Assessment Act already mentioned, and as prescribed by the central board. This valuation list, made and signed by the overseers, is published, and all persons assessed or liable to be assessed, and other interested parties, may, including the officers of other parishes, inspect and take copies of and extracts from that list. A multitude of provisions exist in relation to the valuation and supplemental valuation lists. Objections on the ground of unfairness or incorrectness are dealt with by the committee, who hold meetings to hear and determine such objections. The valuation list, where approved by the committee, is delivered to the overseers, who proceed to make the rate in accordance with the valuation lists and in a prescribed form of rate book. The parish officers certify to the examination and comparison of the rate book with the assessments, and obtain the consent of justices as required by the statute of Elizabeth. This consent or allowance of the rate is merely a ministerial act, and if the rate is good on the face of it the justices cannot inquire into its validity.

The rate is then published and open to inspection. Appeals may be made to special or quarter sessions against the rate, subject to the restriction that, if the objection were such that it might have been dealt with on the valuation lists, no appeal to sessions is permitted unless the valuation list has been duly objected to and the objector had failed to obtain such relief in the matter as he deemed to be just.

In the metropolis a common basis of value for the purposes of government and local taxation is provided, including the promotion of uniformity in the assessment of rateable property. Provision is made for the appointment of an assessment committee by guardians or vestries, and for the preparation of valuation lists, and the deposit and distribution of valuation lists, and for the periodical revision of valuation lists.

Many endeavours have been made to readjust the burden of local expenditure. The system of making grants from the national taxes in aid of local rates has been extended. The principle of the metropolitan common poor fund, a device for giving metropolitan grants assessed on the whole of London in aid of the London local poor law authorities, has been followed, mutatis mutandis, in the relations between the national and the local exchequers. At the time of the repeal of the corn laws, Sir Robert Peel expressed an opinion that this fiscal change necessitated some readjustment of local rates. In that year, 1846, a beginning of grants from the national exchequer in aid of local expenditure was made. The salaries of poor-law teachers, medical officers and auditors were provided from the larger area of taxation, and in 1867 the salaries of public vaccinators were added to the list. In 1874 a grant of 4s. per head per week was made for each pauper lunatic passed by the guardians to the care of a lunatic asylum. By the Local Government Act 1888, supplemented by the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act 1890, this principle was more widely extended. The various grants in aid were abolished, and in substitution the proceeds of certain specified taxes were set aside for local purposes. From this source, the gross amount of which of course varies, there are now distributed to local poor-law authorities some 4s. a week for lunatics in asylums, and allowances based on their average expenditure in previous years in salaries of officials and other specified charges. In London, in order not to conflict with the operation of the common poor fund, which had already spread these charges over a wide area, the grant takes the form of a sum equivalent to about 4d. per diem for each indoor pauper. The number on which this calculation is based is not, however, to be the actual number, but the average of the last five years previous to the passing of the act. By this legislation something like onequarter of the total expenditure on poor law relief is obtained from national taxes as opposed to local rates. By the Agricultural Rates Act 1896 the occupier of agricultural land was excused one-half of certain rates, including the poor rate. The deficiency is supplied by a contribution from the national exchequer. Meanwhile, the spending authority continue to be elected by the local ratepayers. In this connexion two further anomalies deserve notice. By the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act 1869 owners who compound to pay the rates in respect of tenement property are entitled to certain deductions by way of commission. Such payments by the owner are constructively payments by the occupier, who thereby is to be deemed duly rated for any qualification or franchise. Under these arrangements a large number of electors do not contribute directly to the rate. A converse process is also going on, whereby the ownership of an important and increasing body of property is practically unrepresented. This is due to the great growth of property in the hands of railway companies, docks and limited liability companies generally. The railways alone are said to pay considerably over 13% of the local taxation of the country, and they have no local representation. There is, in fact, in local administration a divorce between representation and taxation to a greater extent than is generally supposed, and it is impossible not to connect the fact with the rapid growth of local expenditure and indebtedness.

Table of contents

Royal Commission of 1905-1909

The main points of the system of English poor relief, as still in force in 1910, are as outlined above. That it has been inadequate in dealing with the various problems of unemployment and pauperism, which the constantly changing conditions of the industrial world necessarily evolve had however been long acknowledged. Accordingly,. in 1905 a royal commission was appointed to inquire into the working of the law relating to the relief of poor persons, and into the various means adopted outside of the poor laws for meeting distress arising from want of employment, particularly during the periods of severe industrial depression. The commission took voluminous evidence 1 and its report was issued in 1 The appendix volumes to the Report of the Royal Commission number thirty-four. Their contents are as follows vol. i. English Official Evidence, minutes of evidence mainly of the officers of the Local Government Board for England and Wales; vol. ii. London Evidence, minutes of evidence mainly of London witnesses; vol. iii. Associations and Critics, minutes of evidence mainly of critics of the Poor Law and of witnesses representing Poor Law and Charitable Associations; vol. iv Urban Centres, minutes of evidence containing the oral and written evidence of the British. Medical Association and of witnesses from the following provincial. urban centres - Liverpool and Manchester districts, West Yorkshire,. Midland Towns; vol. v. Minutes of Evidence containing the oral and written evidence of witnesses from urban centres in the following districts - South Wales and North Eastern Counties; vol. vi. Minutes of Evidence relating to Scotland; vol. vii. Minutes of Evidence containing the oral and written evidence of witnesses from various rural centres in the South Western, Western and Eastern Counties, from the parish of Poplar Borough and from the National Conference of Friendly Societies; vol. viii. Minutes of Evidence containing the oral and written evidence of witnesses relating chiefly to the subject of " unemployment "; vol. ix. Evidence of further witnesses on the subject of unemployment; vol. x. Minutes of Evidence relating to Ireland; vol. xi. Miscellaneous Papers. Com munications from Boards of Guardians and others, &c., vol. xii. Reports, Memoranda and Tables prepared by certain of the Commissioners; vol. xiii. Diocesan Reports on the Methods. of administering charitable assistance and the extent and intensity of poverty in England and Wales; vol. xiv. Report on the Methods and Results of the present system of administering indoor and outdoor poor law medical relief in certain unions in England and Wales, by Dr J. C. McVail; vol. xv. Report on the Administrative Relation of Charity and the Poor Law, and the extent and the actual and potential utility of Endowed and Voluntary Charities in England and Scotland, by A. C. Kay and H. V. Toynbee; vol. xvi. Reports on the Relation of Industrial and Sanitary Conditions to Pauperism, by Steel Maitland and Miss R. E. Squire; vol. xvii. Reports on the effect of Outdoor Relief on Wages and the Conditions of Employment, by Thomas Jones and Miss Williams; vol. xviii. Report on the Condition of the Children who are in receipt of the various forms of Poor Law Relief in certain Unions in London and in the Provinces, by Dr Ethel Williams and Miss Longman and Miss Phillips; vol. xix. Reports on the Effects of Employment or Assistance given to the Unemployed since 1886 as a means of relieving distress outside the Poor Law in London, and generally throughout England and Wales, and in Scotland and Ireland, by Cyril Jackson and Rev. J. C. Pringle; vol. xx. Report on Boy Labour in London and certain other typical towns, by Cyril Jackson, with a Memorandum from the General Post Office on the Conditions. of Employment of Telegraph Messengers; vol. xxi. Reports .on the Effect of the Refusal of Out-Relief on the Applicants for such Relief, by Miss G. Harlock; vol. xxii. Report on the Overlapping of the work of the Voluntary General Hospitals with that of Poor Law Medical Relief in certain districts of London, by Miss M. B. Roberts; vol. xxiii. Report on the Condition of the Children who are in receipt of thelvarious forms of Poor Law Relief in certain parishes in Scotland, by Dr C. T. Parsons and Miss Longman and Miss Phillips; vol. xxiv. Report on a Comparison of the Physical Condition of " Ordinary " Paupers in certain Scottish Poorhouses with that of the Able-bodied Paupers in certain English Workhouses. and Labour Yards, by Dr C. T. Parsons; vol. xxv. Statistical Memoranda and Tables relating to England and Wales, prepared by the Staff of the Commission and by Government Departments and others, and Actuarial Reports; vol. xxvi. Documents relating more especially to the administration of charities; vol. xxvii. Replies by Distress Committees in England and Wales to Questions circulated on the subject of the Unemployed Workmen Act 1905; vol. xxviii. Reports of Visits to Poor Law and Charitable Institutions and to Meetings of Local Authorities in the United Kingdom; vol. xxix. Report on the Methods of Administering Charitable Assistance and the extent and intensity of Poverty in Scotland, prepared by the Committee on Church Interests appointed by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland; vol. xxx. Documents relating especially to Scotland; vol. xxxi. Statistical Memoranda and Tables relating to Ireland, &c.; vol. xxxii. Report on Visits paid by the Foreign Labour Colonies Committee of the Commission to certain Institutions in Holland, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland; vol. xxxiii. Foreign and Colonial Systems of Poor 1909. It consists of a majority report, signed by the chairman and 13 other members, and a minority report signed by 4 dissentient members. To this report and its appendices those who wish to obtain an exhaustive account of the working of the English poor law must necessarily have recourse.

The " majority " report opens with a statistical survey of poor law problems, gives an historical sketch of the poor laws Majority down to 183 4, and proceeds to deal in detail with the historical development and present condition of the various branches of the poor law under their appropriate headings: (a) the central authority; (b) the local authority; (c) the officers of the local authority; (d) areas of administration; (e) indoor relief; (f) outdoor relief; (g) the aged; (h) the children; (i) the able-bodied under the poor law and (j) the causes of pauperism. Other portions of the report deal with medical relief, distress due to unemployment, and charities and the relief of distress. In reviewing these various subjects the commission lay bare the main defects of the present system, which they briefly summarize as follows: i. The inadequacy of existing poor law areas to meet the growing needs of administration.

ii. The excessive size of many boards of guardians.

iii. The absence of any general interest in poor law work and poor law elections, due in great part to the fact that poor law stands in no organic relation to the rest of local government.

iv. The lack of intelligent uniformity in the application of principles and in general administration.

v. The want of proper investigation and discrimination in dealing with applicants.

vi. The tendency in many boards of guardians to give outdoor relief without plan or purpose.

vii. The unsuitability of the general workhouse as a test or deterrent for the able-bodied; the aggregation in it of all classes without sufficient classification; and the absence of any system of friendly and restorative help.

viii. The lack of co-operation between poor law and charity.

ix. The tendency of candidates to make lavish promises of out-relief and of guardians to favour their constituents in its distribution.

x. General failure to attract capable social workers and leading citizens.

xi. The general rise in expenditure, not always accompanied by an increase of efficiency in administration.

xii. The want of sufficient control and continuity of policy on the part of the central authority.

The commission stated that these defects have produced a want of confidence in the local administration of the poor law, and that they have been mainly the cause of the introduction of other forms of relief from public funds which are unaccompanied by such conditions as are imperatively necessary as safeguards.

The commission proceed to formulate a scheme of reform, the main features of which are summarized below: Public Assistance. - The commissioners state that the name poor law " has gathered about it associations of harshness, and still more of hopelessness, which might seriously obstruct the reforms they recommend, and they suggest that the title " public assistance " better expresses the system of help outlined in their report. They propose the abolition of the existing boards of guardians, the separation of their duties into two categories, and the calling into existence of two bodies for the discharge of the two sets of functions, viz. a local authority, known as the public assistance authority, with an area conterminous with the area of the county or county borough, for central administration and control; and local committees in existing union area:- for dealing with applications, investigating and supervising cases and undertaking such other duties as may be delegated by the public assistance authority. They recommend that the public assistance authority should be a statutory committee of the County Council, with one-half of its members appointed by the council from persons who are members of the council, and the other half of its members appointed by the council from outside their number, and to consist of persons experienced in the local administration of public assistance or Relief, with a memorandum on the Relief of Famines in India; vol. xxxiv. Alphabetical Lists of Oral and Non-oral Witnesses.

other cognate work, women to be eligible for appointment in either case.

Working in co-operation with the public assistance authorities are to be voluntary aid councils and committees (the former supervising, the latter executive) for aiding persons in distress whose cases do not appear to be suitable for treatment by the public assistance committee. The commission epitomize what they consider to be the main principles of a reformed poor law. They are (I) that the treatment of the poor who apply for public assistance should be adapted to the needs of the individual, and, if institutional, should be governed by classification; (2) that the public administration established for the assistance of the poor should work in co-operation with the local and private charities of the district; (3) that the system of public assistance thus established should include processes of help which would be preventive, curative, and restorative, and (4) that every effort should be made to foster the instincts of independence and self-maintenance amongst those assisted. They proceed to recommend: - Indoor or " Institutional" Relief. - That general workhouses. hould be abolished. That indoor relief should be given in separate institutions appropriate to the following classes of applicants, viz. (a) children, (b) aged and infirm, (c) sick, (d) able-bodied men, (e) able-bodied women, (f) vagrants, and (g) feeble-minded and epileptics. Powers of removal to and detention in institutions should be given, with proper safeguards, to the public assistance authority. The treatment of inmates should be made as far as possible curative and restorative.

Outdoor Relief or " Home Assistance.

This should be given only after thorough inquiry, except in cases of sudden and urgent necessity; it should be adequate to meet the needs of those to whom it is given; persons so assisted should be subject to supervision; that such supervision should include in its purview the conditions, moral and sanitary, under which the recipient is living; that voluntary agencies should be utilized as far as possible for the personal care of individual cases, and that there should be one uniform order governing outdoor relief or home assistance.


Effective steps should be taken to secure that the maintenance of children in the workhouse be no longer recognized as a legitimate way of dealing with them. Boarding-out might and should be greatly extended. Power to adopt children of vicious parents should be more frequently exercised and accompanied by a strict dealing with the parent, and the public assistance authorities should retain supervision of adopted children up to the age of twenty-one. A local government board circular of June 19to to boards of guardians embodied many of the recommendations of the commission. Some recommendations, of course, the guardians are not empowered, under existing legislation, to carry out.

The Aged

As regards institutional relief, the aged should have accommodation and treatment apart from the able-bodied, and be housed on a separate site, and be further subdivided into classes as far as practicable with reference to their physical condition and their moral character. As regards outdoor relief, greater care should be taken to ensure adequacy of relief.

Medical Relief or Assistance

A general system of provident dispensaries should be established, of which existing voluntary outdoor medical organizations should be invited to form an integral part, and every inducement should be offered to the working classes below a certain wage to become, or continue to be, members of a provident dispensary.


The commission review the social and industrial developments since 1834, deal with the new problems, criticize the existing methods of relief, and on their summing up of the new factors and developments, arrive at the conclusions: (a) that there is an increasing aggregation of unskilled labour at the great ports and in certain populous districts; (b) that this aggregation of low-grade labour is so much in excess of the normal local wants as to promote and perpetuate under-employment, and (c) that this normal condition of under-employment, when aggravated by periodic contraction of trade or by inevitable changes in methods of production, assumes such dimensions as to require special machinery and organization for its relief and treatment. The commission proceed to make the following recommendations: Labour Exchanges. - A national system of labour exchanges should be established and worked by the board of trade for the general purpose of assisting the mobility of labour and of collecting accurate information as to unemployment. (These were established by the Labour Exchanges Act 1909; see Unemployment.) Education and Training of the Young for Industrial Life. - The education in the public elementary schools should be much less literary and more practical, and better calculated than at present to adapt the child to its future occupation. Boys should be kept at school until the age of fifteen; exemption below fifteen should be granted only for boys leaving to learn a skilled trade, and there should be school supervision till sixteen and replacing in school if not properly employed.

Regularization of Employment. - Government departments and local and public authorities should be enjoined to regularize their work as far as possible, and to endeavour, as far as possible, to undertake their irregular work when the general demand for labour is slack.

Unemployment Insurance

The establishment and promotion of unemployment insurance, especially amongst unskilled and unorganized labour, is of paramount importance in averting distress arising from unemployment, and is of such national importance as to justify, under specified conditions, contributions from public funds towards its furtherance. The commission further state that this insurance can best be promoted by utilizing the agency of existing trade organizations, or of organizations of a similar character. They are of opinion that no scheme of unemployment insurance, either foreign or British, which has been brought before them, is so free from objections as to justify them in recommending it for general adoption.

Labour Colonies

The commission recommend their establishment and use. (For these see Vagrancy.) Four out of the seventeen members of the commission, being unable to agree with their colleagues, issued a separate report, which is very nearly as voluminous as that of the majority. Their recommendations were more drastic than those of the majority, and had for their aim not a reform of the poor law as it exists, but its entire breakup. The minority agree with the majority in recommending the abolition of workhouses, but instead of setting up new authorities, they consider that the duties of the guardians should be transferred to the county authorities, with an appropriate distribution among four existing committees of the county council. They recommend that the education committee become responsible for the entire care of children of school age. That the health committee should care for the sick and permanently incapacitated, infants under school age, and the aged requiring institutional care. The asylums committee should have charge of the mentally defective and the pension committee of the aged to whom pensions are awarded.

The minority consider there should be some systematic coordination, within each local area, of all forms of public assistance and, if possible, of all assistance dispensed by voluntary agencies, and they recommend the appointment, by the county or county borough council, of one or more responsible officers, called " registrars of public assistance." Their duties would be to keep a register of all persons receiving any form of public assistance within their districts; they would assess the charge to be made on individuals liable to pay any part of the cost of the service rendered to them or their dependants, and recover the amount thus due. They would also have to consider the proposals of the various committees of the council for the payment of out-relief, or, as the minority prefer to term it, " home aliment." Other various duties are allotted to them in the report.

The subject of unemployment was considered by the minority and they made the following recommendations: Ministry of Labour. - The duty of organizing the national labour market should be placed upon a minister responsible to parliament. The ministry of labour should have six distinct and separately organized divisions; viz. the national labour exchange; the trade insurance division; the maintenance and training division; the industrial regulation division; the emigration and immigration division, and the statistical division.

National Labour Exchange

The function of the national labour exchange should be, not only, (a) to ascertain and report the surplus or shortage of labour of particular kinds, at particular places; and (b) to diminish the time and energy now spent in looking for work, and the consequent leaking between jobs; but also (c) so to dovetail casual and seasonal employments as to arrange for practical continuity of work for those now chronically unemployed.

Absorption of Surplus Labour

To reduce the surplus of labour the minority recommend (a) that no child should be employed, in any occupation whatsoever, below the age of fifteen; no young person under eighteen for more than thirty hours per week, and all so employed should be required to attend some suitable public institution for not less than thirty hours per week for physical training and technical education; (b) the hours of labour of railway, omnibus and tramway employees should be reduced to a maximum of sixty, if not of forty-eight in any one week; and (c) wage-earning mothers of young children should be withdrawn from the industrial world by giving them sufficient public assistance for the support of their families.

Regularization of the National Demand for Labour

In order to meet the periodically recurrent general depressions of trade the government should take advantage of there being at these periods as much unemployment of capital as there is unemployment of labour; that it should definitely undertake, as far as practicable, the regularization of the national demand for labour; and that it should, for this purpose, and to the extent of at least £4,000,000 a year, arrange a portion of the ordinary work required by each department on a ten years' programme; £40,000,000 worth of work for the decade being then put in hand, not by equal annual instalments, but exclusively in the lean years of the trade cycle; being paid for out of loans for short terms raised as they are required, and being executed with the best available labour, at standard rates, engaged in the ordinary way. That in this ten years' programme there should be included works of afforestation, coast protection and land reclamation; to be carried out by the board of agriculture exclusively in the lean years of the trade cycle; by the most suitable labour obtainable, taken on in the ordinary way at the rates locally current for the work, and paid for out of loans raised as required.

Trade Union Insurance

In view of its probable adverse effect on trade union membership and organization the minority commissioners cannot recommend the establishment of any plan of government or compulsory insurance against unemployment. They recommend, however, a government subvention not exceeding one half of the sum actually paid in the last preceding year as outof-work benefit should be offered to trade unions or other societies providing such benefit.

Maintenance and Training

For the ultimate residuum of men in distress from want of employment the minority recommend that maintenance should be freely provided, without disfranchisement, on condition that they submit themselves to the physical and mental training that they may prove to require. Suitable clay training depots or residential farm colonies should be established, where the men's whole working time would be absorbed in such varied beneficial training of body and mind as they proved capable of; their wives and families being, meanwhile, provided with adequate home aliment.


The Report and Evidence of the Royal Commission of1905-1909is a library in itself on the subject of pauperism. The contents of the various volumes are given supra. Other important publications are Report and Evidence of Royal Commission on Aged Poor (1895); Report and Evidence of Select Committee of House of Commons on Distress from Want of Employment (1895); Report of Departmental Committee on Vagrancy (1906). See also the references in the bibliography to CHARITY AND CHARITIES; and Sir G. Nicholls and T. Mackay, A History of the English Poor Law (3 vols., 1899); the publications of the Charity Organization Society; Reports of Poor Law Conferences. For list of subjects discussed, see index to Report of Central Conferences.

<< Poore

Popayan >>


Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address