Introduction:
In British and Irish history, the term ‘poor relief’ is referred to the government and ecclesiastical action to alleviate poverty. Throughout the centuries various authorities have needed to decide whose poverty deserves relief and also who should finance the cost of helping the destitute. With changing attitudes towards poverty over the years, many methods have been attempted to solve the problem. Since the early 16th century legislation on poverty enacted by the English Parliament, poor relief has developed from being little more than an organised means of punishment into a compassionate government-funded approach providing support and protection, especially following the creation in the 1940s of the welfare state.
In this essay I plan to discuss the rationale underpinning the provision of poor relief in the 19th
…show more content…
This was because the rising costs of social welfare provision became a considerable amount and there was a spreading disincentive to work as the relief provided was usually better than some jobs’ salaries. Also, providing relief to the able-bodied poor had pauperised a large section of the population. The term ‘pauper’ comes from this era, describing a person who seeks welfare from the state. There was a system of indoor and outdoor relief. Indoor relief, by means of entering the workhouse to receive relief, and outdoor relief, without entering the workhouse. For obvious reasons which will be stated in this essay, outdoor relief was the preferred of the two.
The law faced the dilemma of how to provide to the poor without encouraging their dependency of the state. Later referred to as the ‘New Poor Law’, it had different guiding principles to that of past poor laws. The new law stopped providing relief for the able-bodied poor except by offering them employment in the workhouse (indoor relief), purely with the objective of stimulating workers to seek regular employment rather than
Life in Europe during the 1500’s and 1600’s was full of reformation, wars of religion, and exploration of new places and ideas. The poor were greatly affected during this time. They were part of the church reformation when Martin Luther separated from Catholic Christendom and created his own church. In religious wars, like the Thirty Years’ War, the poor were usually the people fighting which had a tremendous impact on their lives and families. With the growth of exploration, the poor moved around which affected their community. The attitudes and responses towards the poor in Europe between 1450 and 1700 included that they were undeserving and lazy; they needed help, should be put to work, and should be given help.
During the mid 15th century to the early 18th century almost half of Europe’s total population could be considered poor and destitute. The attitudes of the clergy and the attitudes of the socially elite toward these people varied from pity to disgust, and their proposed solution to these problems differed. Some suggested helping all of the poor by giving them alms, some warned others to be careful of whom the money was given to and some people believed that being poor was a voluntary decision and if they wanted to get out of that situation, they do so without the help of others. In particular the clergy supported alms giving, government officials and the nobility advocated controlled giving, and some of the middle class were suspicious
During the nineteenth century charity was viewed as a way the rich could earn salvation by caring for the less fortunate. Being apart of this group disabled people were affected by the inequalities in the system. The growth of capitalism and industrialization led to a change in family dynamics as more people were leaving the home and working in factories and disabled people were in need of aid that they had been receiving from the family. The wealthy controlled the conditions for these workers entering the workforce and because welfare was paid for through taxation it became a way of social control. The wealthy paid more taxes so recipients of these charities were dependent on them. Any civil disobedience could lead in less aide for disabled
DBQ: Analyze attitudes toward and responses to “the poor” in Europe between approximately 1450 and 1700.
Those who did not engage in illegal behavior and received aid were seen as lazy and unwilling to work for money, when it could be handed out to them. Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, in a 1531 decree to the Netherlands, stated that if begging was universally permitted, "Many errors and abuses will result, [as the poor] will fall into idleness." Only those who were incapable of work should receive aid, the proclamation mandated. The town council of Rouen, France, however, disagreed with the Emperor: "Those who are unwilling to work should indeed be expelled," while those who could work should be given jobs by the civil government. Those who did not work, according to the minutes of the council session, were not to be considered poor, and therefore not helped. William Turner, an English doctor, agreed with this view of the worthlessness of the idle poor: "They would much rather be sick [and idle]...than be well" and work to honestly earn a living. A poorhouse in Suffolk County, England, published regulations in 1588 that advocated the harsh treatment of its residents. "Every strong rouge...shall have 12 stripes with the whip," whilst the younger poor or idlers were to receive six. The poorhouse used repression and physical measures to force the poor into submission, supposedly for their own good.
The town council of Dijon, France proposed to care for the poor using their own utilities of shelter during the 15th century (doc. 2). The poorhouses of Suffolk County, England required harsh treatment of the poor (doc. 7). Being of England during the height of poverty, the poorhouses of Suffolk County complied with the English Poor Laws, legislation that supported harsher treatment of the poor for their impotence and begging. Jean Maillefer stated that the poor of the seventeenth century have grown independent from higher classes, begging less for the charity of others (doc. 11). Having listened to the poor, Maillefer concluded that their simple life does not need assistance from wealthy merchants such as himself. As the amount of poverty in Europe rose, the care for their well-being dwindled from the volunteered charity of the 15th century humanists, to the institutionalized subsidizing of the 16th century resulted from the growing poverty, to the lack of aid in the 17th century resulted from the independence of the poor away from the care of the upper
Between 1450 and 1700 the attitudes towards the European poor changed dramatically. In the 1400’s the poor were looked at with sympathy and compassion and the aid from the public and institutions was very common. By the 16th century they were looked at with suspicion and harsh measures, to make sure they were not becoming lazy using welfare as a substitute for labor. The more religious people had attitudes towards them hoping to assist them, but some with a harsher view saw them as lazy and unwilling to work hard to earn a living. During the period of 1450 and 1700 people tried to create some relief for the poor.
Poverty has been a big issue over the past century or so and continues to be a problem to this day in the United States. Due to the Civil War, rural areas and industrial areas were affected by poverty. The poverty of rural sharecroppers in 1877 was different from the poverty of unemployed industrial workers in 1939. Even though both situations were dealing with a form of poverty, both were two completely different situations. There were several major events that happened that caused poverty of rural sharecroppers in 1877. Although there were various events leading up to the poverty of unemployed industrial workers in 1939, poverty in the year of 1877 was just as bad, if not worse, as in the year of 1939.
The objective of this essay is to illuminate my overall reaction to the reading of “The Working Poor” conveying what I do not like while highlighting a sociological perspective, in addition to explaining if the reading is applicable to my own life experience. Taking notice, the subject at hand was very sobering alluding even if we ourselves have not been partakers of living in the obscurity of prosperity between poverty and wellbeing, certainly we have encountered someone that has become a victim to it. With this in mind, my reaction is there are countless victims of poverty; surely one does not have to go very far to find them as we understand them to be the working class. There are those that may express the thought of
Throughout the mid 14th-to late 17th century, almost half of Europe’s population was considered poor. Many different standpoints on the poor were taken. Some felt that there should be a distinction between those that were poor and idle, and those that were poor but unable to find a job. Others felt that alms (charity), along with sympathy should’ve been given to the poor. An alternate view was that those who were poor wanted to remain poor.
It was obvious that the same new measures were needed primarily to save money on the rates but also possibly to tackle the causes of poverty. No solution appeared other than the complete abolishment of the poor allowance, which few wanted. Under the allowance system, one could work and receive outdoor relief in the form of cash payments as long as you resided in the parish of your birth. This system was said to encourage laziness as the poor would have no incentive to work hard or to respect their employers as they knew that their parish would look after them. The allowance system was regarded by the ruling class as an ‘unmitigated evil’.
During the colonial period, the Elizabethan poor laws were adopted to address the social issue of poverty. Residency was a main factor in determining who was eligible for aid. Categories "worthy" and "unworthy" were set to determine who would qualify for assitance. Unfortunately the individuals in the "unworthy" category were the very individuals more in need of assistance.
During the early nineteenth century poverty was major issue, the Poor Law passed earlier in the Tudor period put responsibility on local parishes to pay tax to help the poor. However, over the years the financial strain on parishes became too much and in 1834 The Poor Amendment Act was passed. This was to help reduce the cost of looking after the poor and it was to stop the payment of tax unless you had special circumstances. If the poor wanted help they had to go in to workhouses and work, in exchange for clothes, food, free healthcare and a few hours of schooling for children. The poor had no choice but to go in there for help. On one hand The Poor Amendment Act 1834 was good as it gave the poor free food, shelter, healthcare and education for their children. However, the conditions in the work houses were made so awful that people would avoid going in there unless they were really desperate. The diet was bad, families were spilt up and the people in there had to wear uniform.
Prior to the Poor Law Amendment Act there was the Elizabethan Poor Law 1601 which was more generous towards the poor. It was becoming impossible for the government to sustain this law due to the growing costs. Statistics show that in 1802 the expenditure on poor relief was costing the government £4,078,000, this figure continued to
With inventions such as quicker and more effective ways of transit, the Utopian suburbia was born and alleviated overcrowding problems cities faced. However, many members of the poorer class were not able to remedy their living conditions that places outside of the city offered. The many helpful factors suggested by the aiding systems of the 19th century may have given a more acceptable living standard to the poor. But if you were born into the poor class you were stuck in the poor class unless you worked your life out of debt if you were able survive as long. Today, there are many reform programs and policies to help the lower classes; are few are namely unemployment agencies, welfare, shelters and educational practices. Despite years of reform, a lack in abundance of shelter or food stamps exemplifies the modern hardship that was comparable to the difficulties the people of the 19th century faced.(p1 para3, Newfield)