The Peel Web
I am happy that you are using this web site and hope that you found it useful. Unfortunately, the cost of making this material freely available is increasing, so if you have found the site useful and would like to contribute towards its continuation, I would greatly appreciate it. Click the button to go to Paypal and make a donation.
Relief was given in variety of ways, and not all parishes had a poor-house or house of correction. It soon became obvious that some parishes were more sympathetic towards their poor, and this tended to result in paupers moving into that area from less generous parishes. To prevent this, parliament passed the
This stated that a person had to have a 'settlement' in order to obtain relief from a parish. This could be secured by:
If a labourer moved away from his parish of origin in search of work the JPs issued him with a certificate of settlement saying that if the man fell on hard times his own parish would receive him back and pay for him to be 'removed'.
The Settlement Laws caused problems because they:
In 1723, Sir Edward Knatchbull's legislation For Amending the Laws relating to the Settlement, Imployment and Relief of the Poor allowed the establishment of workhouses where poor relief would be provided. This could be done either by an individual parish or through the combining of a number of neighbouring parishes which would share the cost: parishes had the authority to rent or buy appropriate accommodation. The local JPs could also sub-contract the administration of relief to someone who would feed, clothe and house the poor for a weekly rate from the parish. Between 1723 and 1750, about 600 parish workhouses were established in England and Wales.
The legislation also marked the first appearance of the 'workhouse test' - that anyone who applied for relief would have to enter the workhouse where s/he would be obliged to undertake set work in return for relief. The principle was that entering the workhouse should be a deterrent to casual in irresponsible claims on the poor rates. Only the truly desperate would apply to 'the house'. This principle was adopted under the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act.
A refuge for the destitute that was maintained by charitable donations
In 1776, the first official workhouse returns were made showing the existence of about 2,000 workhouses, each with between 20 and 50 inmates. The cost of indoor relief was high; inefficient workhouse management led to increased social pressure for more sympathetic treatment of the poor. This led to the passing of Gilbert's Act in 1782.
Also in 1776, Adam Smith published his Wealth of Nations in which he said that the State should not interfere with the economy but should let the laws of supply and demand operate freely. The implication of this for poor relief was that those who could not work should be allowed to fend for themselves - and starve if necessary - rather than having the State provide any form of relief. Further, it was thought that men would work for any wage rather than starve themselves and their families; lower wages would benefit employers and reduce the price of food.
Thomas Gilbert, an MP, attempted to have this Act passed in 1765 but failed; he then spent the next 17 years attempting to have his Bill passed. He finally succeeded in 1782. The Act allowed groups of parishes to form unions and build joint poor-houses for the totally destitute, in order to share the cost of poor relief through 'poor houses' which were established for looking after only the old, the sick and the infirm. Able-bodied paupers explicitly were excluded from these poor-houses: instead, either they were to be provided with
Land-owners, farmers and other employers were to receive allowances from the parish rates so they could bring wages up to subsistence levels. Gilbert's Act is often used to demonstrate the government's humanitarianism but it was even more important in expanding the scope of poor relief and attempting to bring the gentry into closer involvement in poor relief administration.
This first saw light of day in 1795. It was introduced by the magistrates in the Berkshire village of Speenhamland (or Speen) in an effort to relieve the extreme poverty which existed and was adopted widely. The administration of poor relief was in the hands of about 15,000 parishes and few public men had any precise idea of the true situation. The general feeling was that poor relief was increasing on an unprecedented scale and the reaction to this came after 1815. The Speenhamland system became widespread in southern England and was extensively used in the so-called 'Swing' counties. It offered any one, or several forms of relief:
By 1796 outdoor relief was given without a workhouse test because it was a period of widespread distress and unrest. Also many paupers were not able-bodied and parishes were not big enough to cope with the problems.
In 1818 the Act for the Regulation of Parish Vestries (58 Geo. III c. 69 was passed. This set up a plural voting system in a parish vestry, depending on the rateable value of property. A landowner of property worth £50 was eligible for one vote; for every further £25 a man was given another vote up to a maximum of six votes. This scale was used later by the Poor Law Amendment Act for the election of Guardians of the Poor.
The following year, the Act to Amend the Law for the Relief of the Poor (59 Geo. III c.12) was passed. This added a resident clergyman to the ex-officio members of the vestry. Vestries were told to distinguish between the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor. The latter group was deemed to be idle, extravagant and/or profligate. This Act provided for the employment of salaried overseers, better-kept accounts and either the building or enlargement of workhouses. Also, under this legislation, two JPs were needed to agree to force the Vestry to give poor relief, rather than only one JP as before. This was intended to prevent "generous" JPs from helping anyone who appealed for assistance. Together these two pieces of legislation are known either as the Select Vestries Acts or the Sturges-Bourne Acts after the MP who was responsible for them.
The allowance system became common during the French Wars and the general adoption of the Speenhamland (type) system met with little opposition. The cost of poor relief reached new peaks even in relation to the increased population.
In 1815 there was much political and social unrest because of the ending of the French Wars, the industrial and agricultural depression and the increase in unemployment. Attitudes towards the poor changed. There was a growing belief in the rural south that charity, over and beyond the relief of dire necessity, led to idleness and vice. There was also a belief that allowances and subsidies created excess rural population and idleness. The problem of poor relief was considered by parliamentary enquiries which led to the Poor Law Commission of 1832-34. Its report was influential and affected poor relief policy into the 20th century.
However, in the industrial north, attitudes towards poor relief were different from those to be found in the south. As industry developed, there was a need for workers and if there was work, then most people were employed. If there was no work, then everyone was unemployed. This was particularly true in the textile districts where the anti-Poor Law campaign was at its strongest. It was generally believed that the existing systems of poor relief were more than adequate to meet the needs of the unemployed and others in need of relief.
|Meet the web creator||
These materials may be freely used for
non-commercial purposes in accordance with applicable statutory allowances
and distribution to students.
Last modified 12 January, 2016
|American Affairs 1760-83||The Age of the French Wars 1792-1815||Irish Affairs 1760-89|
|Economic Affairs in the Age of Peel||Irish
|Primary sources index||British Political Personalities||British Foreign policy 1815-65||European history||