The Poor Law Amendment Act and Tackling Poverty
The Poor Law of 1601 was the first to codify the idea of the state to provide for the welfare of its citizens. It distinguished between the 'deserving' and the 'undeserving' poor; relief was local and community controlled.1 The 1834 Poor Law Act Amendment Act was an amendment to the Act for the relief of The English Poor Law of 1601.
The Speenhamland System
The Speenhamland System first saw light of day in 1795. It was introduced by the magistrates in the Berkshire village of Speenhamland in an effort to relieve the extreme poverty, which existed and was adopted widely. It offered any one, or several forms of relief including:
(a) Allowances to supplement earned wages.
(b) The amount of relief to be given was calculated on the price of a gallon loaf of bread (weighing 8lb. 7oz.) and the number of children a man had.
The 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act
The 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act was introduced as a result of Earl Grey, the Prime Minister, setting up a Poor Law Commission to examine the working of the poor Law system in Britain. In their report published in 1834, the Commission made several recommendations to Parliament. As a result, the Poor Law Amendment Act was passed.
Indoor relief in workhouses replaced outdoor relief (money or goods, that enabled the poor to stay in their own homes), and workhouses were made repellent to encourage the able bodied to maintain themselves and their families.
The major aim of the New Poor Law was to deter people from claiming poor relief and at the very heart of the Act the Victorians' central commitment to self-reliance or independence. The Poor Law was the big stick meant to drive them back to respectable, valuabl...
... middle of paper ...
...http:www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~scoggins/316british/GreatExpectations/class.html (13th December 2000)
4. http://www.ds.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/adwo3/peel/andover.htm
(4th December 2000)
5. Ibid.
6. http://users.ox.ac.uk/~peter/workhouse/poorlaws/poorlaws.html
(28th November 2000)
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Lpoor1834.htm (12th December 2000)
10. http://www.ds.dial.pipex.com (12th December 2000)
11. http://www.david_philips.history (4th December 2000)
12. Ibid.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Bibliography:
1. David Taylor, (1988) Mastering Economic and Social History, Macmillan
2. Best, G. (1971). Mid-Victorian Britain 1851-75, Fontana Press
3. Knott, J. W. (1986) Popular opposition to the 1834 Poor Law, Billing & Sons Ltd
4. Norman Gash, (1987) Aristocracy and People Britain 1815-1865, Richard Clay Ltd
There was a growing sense that the poor did not deserve assistance and so in 1834 the ‘Poor Law Amendment Act’ was introduced. This was designed to make conditions more severe and to even further force self-improvement amongst the poor. ‘The central objective…was to withdraw poor relief from men judged ‘able-bodied’ in Poor Law terminology’. (Thane: 1978: 29) Alternatives such as the work-house were introduced. The notion that you should only ask for help if you desperately needed it as a last resource loomed. The Charity Organisation Society was ‘a body w...
In fact, many believed the poor were just worthless idlers who were not even trying to better there own situations, but instead were taking the high roads away from taxes and worries (Document 11). There were many observed instances in which those in poverty, when given the opputinity to better their lives, chose to stay poor and recieve handouts. One such cause comes from William Turner, and English Physican for Lord Earl of Somerset when he recounts how poor folks often begged on the Earl's door but when Turner offered to help health wise, they chose to stay sick and beg (Document 6). Similar to modern day abusers of the American Wellfare system, officals became very angry with idlers who did nothing but feed off the wealth of the working class in the form of alms. They even believed that idlers should be expelled from their communites as they only bring economics down (Document 5). Many also thought that in order received any aid at all a person must be working. Reforms such as the Workhouse Test Act in 1723, though this occured later than the period of discussion, were a result of these opinions. This act, among others, required that people work a set amount of hours before they could receive any aid. Even the famous Cardinal Richelieu of France believed that the idlers were “good-for-nothings” who were restricting those who actually needed help from getting it while they were being lazy and greedy (Document 8). This opinion of certain poor indivudals being lazy and abusing resources remains amoung those in power even today in
...t jobs because of education, although it was limited (Salisbury and Kersten, Law in Crime in Victorian England).
Their standards required for businessmen were also known for being unusually harsh. According to Albion’s Seed, “When angry customers complained of being overcharged for a bridle and a bag of nails, [Robert] Keayne was formally charged in General Court with oppression, for having taken ‘above six-pence in the shilling profit; in some above eight-pence and in small things above two for one...
The other piece of legislation with the most intense resistance was the New Poor Law introduced in 1834. That policy was criticised because of its dire consequences on poor relief and the people identified with Chartism when they all condemned the injustice carried by this act. Politicians were called untrustworthy, since the New Poor Law was accepted without controversy by Members of Parliament, even if it was at odds with the people’s interests. Indeed, the workhouse system led to the separation of families, the humiliation of the poor and their stigmatisation as people who did not embrace the Victorian virtues of self-help praised by the Liberals and did not deserve respectability. The clauses of the Poor Law encouraged infanticide, threatened
The poor laws and ordinances of 1522 and 1541 express the christian mindset on poverty relief. These new laws instilled new rulings and regulations on the poor to provide the support to citizens in need as well as to the surrounding community. The implementation of the Office of Alms Lords was designed to closer regulate those in need of welfare assistance to ensure wise spending and a lack of corruption. Inspections and strict guidelines were enforced to limit the ability of people to beg in public so to not disturb the city. However, guidelines on the poor continued to get stricter as the 16th century progressed, due to the authorities’ concerns about increased fraud through both false marriages and gambling/drinking. These regulations progressed
...residents sought to promote the welfare of all those who were afflicted by poverty. They helped the poor because they believed that if given the opportunity then they would one day succeed and be productive citizens like non-poor Americans. They also strove to figure out why the poor were poor. They wanted to change the social as well as economic standing of those who were afflicted by poverty.
The Elizabeth Poor Law advocated and placed responsibility of the poor to the churches and government. If parishes could not meet the responsibilities, counties were required to assume relief-giving functions. The government became the chief enforcer of poor relief. However, the local parishes fulfilled their welfare responsibilities in several ways. They provided outdoor relief to persons in the homes; provided indoor relief to person in special institutions that came to be variously known as almshouse, poorhouses or workhouses; or required person to become indenture servants or apprentices. It also required relatives to care for their impoverished relatives. The poor were provided with unemployment relief, initiated works; regulated local prices to help poor persons; gave in-kind assistance such a as food, clothing, and wood, provided health care; and removed children from abusive households’ and gave legal protection . Many local jurisdictions possessed “laws of settlement” that entitled people to receive local poor law relief after a year’s residence.
An upcoming Chartist founder in 1832, Henry Hetherington had quoted that the ‘Reform Act was never intended to do you one particle of good.’ Opinions like Henry Hetherington’s after the passing of 1832 Reform Act eventually led to the emergence of Chartism as a national movement in 1837, who were predominately working class and depicted the ‘Great ‘Reform Act of 1832 as a betrayal and a failure, rather than being ‘Great’. The Reform Act was hoped by many to be a ‘remedy’ for many of those from the lower end of the social classes and finally a chance for them to get their voices heard by the government through enfranchisement, however many thought they were ‘deceived’ by it when it was passed. On the other hand, Historians have contended
have chosen the case of Hugh Bacalla Garth, as it is a relevant example of how the change of a law is being applied, the consequences and some implications on people's life.
If you were poverty stricken, an unwanted orphan, or an impoverished widow, if you were too old to work, or you were sick or deranged, you could end up in the dreaded union workhouse. The Poor Law of 1601 made the welfare of the poor the responsibility of parish councils. The council would house the poor in either a cottage, or in a house built for the purpose. Some poor people were provided with money food and clothing whilst continuing to live in their own homes.
When Bleak House was written, the Victorian Court system matched the Victorian atmosphere. The robing rooms lacked resources, so the “ . . . lawyers were forced to share the scant supply of towels, combs, and water . . . [while the] ‘English Courts of Law’ talks of general rudeness toward jury members, witnesses, and clients.” (Ratner 1) Not only was everyone involved in the courts treated poorly, but “ . . . the court rarely informed these groups of the proceedings . . .. “ (Ratner 2) This idea becomes the central conflict of Bleak House; a court case entangles many generations, and nobody remembers what caused the lawsuit because of their lack of information surrounding it. Due to the typicality of this situation during the Victorian era, it is clear why Dickens chooses to critique it.
In Australia poverty cannot undermine social rights technically as there is no document within Australian law that claims any such rights for Australian Citizens. Nor is there any federal definition of poverty. However, as Australia is part of certain ethical organisations (such as the UN) by imposing those well-articulated details of social rights onto the Australian nation we are able to assess whether poverty has a detrimental or undermining effect on these rights. According to oxford dictionary right define as “a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something (Oxford dictionaries 2016). Although, Australia is characterised as a welfare state, it does not guarantee that welfare as a right for everyone. For instance, there is no Australian
Charles Dickens shows notable amounts of originality and morality in his novels, making him one of the most renowned novelists of the Victorian Era and immortalizing him through his great novels and short stories. One of the reasons his work has been so popular is because his novels reflect the issues of the Victorian era, such as the great indifference of many Victorians to the plight of the poor. The reformation of the Poor Law 1834 brings even more unavoidable problems to the poor. The Poor Law of 1834 allows the poor to receive public assistance only through established workhouses, causing those in debt to be sent to prison. Unable to pay debts, new levels of poverty are created. Because of personal childhood experiences with debt, poverty, and child labor, Dickens recognizes these issues with a sympathetic yet critical eye. Dickens notices that England's politicians and people of the upper class try to solve the growing problem of poverty through the Poor Laws and what they presume to be charitable causes, but Dickens knows that these things will not be successful; in fact they are often inhumane. Dickens' view of poverty and the abuse of the poor
Social issues are problems in the society today that are described as wrong, widespread and changeable. A category of conditions that people believe need to be changed. Poverty is a serious social issue in the society today. According to Peilin (2012), poverty brings hardships to families and individuals as well as political thereby negatively affecting the social stability and social development and posing a severe threat to human security (p. 243). This paper focuses on poverty as a social issue in today’s society. First, it gives a succinct introduction of the social issue, and then describes how it fits into the field of sociology. It also evaluates the sociological theories and terminology that relate to the social issue. The section that follows evaluates what is known and unknown about the particular social issue. This is followed by a discussion regarding the value of sociological research into the issue determining the available or possible practical implications of the sociological inquiry. The information presented here is strongly supported by the concepts and theories derived from reliable sources.