Opposition to the Elizabethan Poor LawOpposition to the Poor Law grew in the early nineteenth century after the Napoleonic Wars with France, especially among academic circles. Most free market economists such as David Ricardo felt it should be abolished, Thomas Malthus thought it was self-defeating and others such as Robert Owen, on the other hand, thought that it did not extend far enough.[1] Thomas MalthusDemographer and economist Thomas Malthus also felt that the Poor Law ought to be abolished, since it limited the mobility of labour. Although he conceded that if there had been no poor law there would be "a few more instances of severe distress," he still felt that "the aggregate mass of happiness among the common people would have been much greater than it is at present." However, he was one of the first to advocate so called 'indoor relief' in workhouses for the poor as opposed to handouts.[2] David RicardoDavid Ricardo supported the abolition of the Poor Law in his book 'Principles of Political Economy and Taxation' published in 1817. He argued that moving resources into welfare moves them out of the economy, which reduces the money available to pay wages. He also argued that it gave an incentive for laziness, discouraged people from saving for old age or illness, and encouraged irresponsibly large families.[3] Chadwick, Bentham and UtilitarianismEdwin Chadwick was a Benthamite and criticized the Old Poor Law because of the lack of centralization involved in the system. Jeremy Bentham was one of the earliest proponents of Utilitarianism - the theory that society should be organised in order to secure the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Chadwick was a supporter of the views of Jeremy Bentham. Bentham believed that wages would find their true levels in a free-market system where there was state control to maintain common agreed standards. One major criticism of the Old Poor Law was the variation between different areas of the country. Chadwick developed Bentham's views by suggesting that the able-bodied poor should be made to work in workhouses which met the condition of less eligibility - not claiming outdoor relief as they did under the existing Poor Law. Conditions had to be worse than those for the poorest labourer outside the workhouse so that people would not want to claim relief therefore decreasing the poor rate. Chadwick believed that wages would then find their true levels. He was able to influence the New Poor Law legislation by contributing to the 1832 Royal Commission into the Poor Law and by working as a Secretary to the Poor Law Commission set up after the Poor Law Amendment Act. Chadwick was critical of the excessive cost of the Poor Law on rate payers.
-1832 Royal Commission It has been suggested that the French Wars and Corn Laws can partly exaplin this increase in cost.[5] Charles DickensThe writings of Charles Dickens were critical of the workhouse system. Dickens himself had been a pauper. Oliver Twist, a social novel, criticises the workhouse system. Robert OwenRobert Owen was a socialist who supported creating full employment by principles of cooperative ownership and against individualism which he thought was one of the causes of poverty. Instead, he used an approach based on macroeconomics that would see the gold standard replaced by a form of paper money and prices based on the amount of labour put into a produce, similar to Marxist Economics.[6] Again in support of the poor Thomas Paine supported heavy taxation of the rich. Opposition to the 1834 Poor Law Amendment ActThe Times criticised the Poor Law Amendment Act stating that the bill would "disgrace the statue book".[7] The workhouse master at Abingdon was the subject of a murder attempt which similarly highlights the unpopularity of the law.[8] John Fielden an industrialist and owner of textile mills at Todmorden, Yorkshire did not support the New Poor Law and attempted to prevent the Act from being implemented in his area. He led a rate revolt against the Act[9] The radical MP William Cobbett criticised the Act by claiming that the poor had an automatic right to relief and that the Act aimed to "enrich the landowner" at the expense of the poor. However the Bills received little opposition from either the House of Commons or the House of Lords before gaining Royal Ascent.[10] Richard Oastler addressed anti-Poor Law meetings and wrote letters to newspapers like the Leeds Intelligencer and the Sheffield Iris in which they denounced the Poor Law Amendment Act as being cruel and unChristian.[11] The anger of the Welsh laborers over the introduction of the Poor Law Amendment Act spilled over into the Rebecca Riots of 1842-43 over the introduction of tolls. Opposition in Wales was focused on the centralisation that the new Act would involve and the belief that Welsh rate payers could claim exemption because of the differing economic structure and poor relief systems in England and Wales[12] Methodist Joseph Rayner Stephens was a prominent figure in the campaign against the Poor Law Amendment Act. He organised boycotts against shop owners and in Huddersfield he encouraging people to disrupt meetings of the local Poor Law Guardians. Because of this behavior he was eventually imprisoned.[13] The Poor Law was most unpopular in the North of England where the poor had been used to the previous system of outdoor relief.[14] Rumour and propaganda
Genuine fears
Protests in the SouthMost of the research and evidence done by the poor Law Commission of Enquiry had taken place in the South East of England and when the Poor Law Amendment Act was introduced it was in a phase of economic growth. Most of the opposition here came from local magistrates who were unhappy because their power to enforce the Poor Law had been removed and disliked the removal of the traditional master-servant relationship. There were riots in Buckinghamshire when paupers were transported 3 miles from Chalfont St. Giles to Amersham and the police had to use the Riot Act to calm riots down. In East Anglia new workhouses were attacked.[10] Protests in the NorthThere was opposition from the north to interference from Londoners who wanted to prevent cheaper outdoor relief during a period of cyclical unemployment. This along with the Ten Hours Movement caused many anti-poor law associations to spring up. While there were protests in areas such as Oldham and Huddersfield in other areas the Poor Law Amendment Act was implemented relatively easily. The Poor Law Commissioners had disagreed on how the New Act should be implemented in the North of England[17] with Edwin Chadwick arguing that it should have been implemented there first as there were new economic problems in 1834. When the Act was implemented in the North in 1837 there were severe economic problems making it appear that paupers were being punished for economic problems they had no control over.[18] In Bradford the Poor Law Guardians had to be protected by troops after riots against the Act; the Huddersfield Guardians defied the law for over a year. Groups that were against the PLAA - radicals and paternalistic Tories were so different that the movement quickly failed.[10] Often opposition to the Poor Law was an extension of support for the Ten Hours Movement.[19] Opposition to the New Poor Law was great in the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire where there were also movements supporting factory reform, parliamentary reform and the beginnings of trade union activity.[20] TacticsTactics which those who opposed to the Poor Law Amendment Act employed included:
End of oppositionMost opposition to the Poor Law was not organised and therefore had little chance of succeeding against the will of the government. Furthermore, the deportation of the Tolpuddle martyrs had the effect of halting organised opposition to the poor law. However, an unlikely association of wealthy, paternalistic, Tories and working class radicals was formed, and although it failed quickly, it would again find itself rebuilt to a degree in the governments of Benjamin Disraeli years later. Until then, many working-class men turned to Chartism as a result.[10] External links
References
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||