Question 1
Using these four sources in their historical context, assess how far they support the view that the negative impact on the work force was the most important reason for the abolition of the Old Poor
Law.
Source A: The vicar of Cholesbury parish, Buckinghamshire, when interviewed by the commissioners of the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, explains how demand for outdoor relief had increased.
The population has been almost stationary since 1801 when the rates were only £10 a year, and only one person received relief. The sum raised for the relief of the poor rose from £99 in 1816 to £150 in 1831. In 1832, when it was proceeding at the rate of £367 a year, it became impossible to collect any more as the landlords and farmers had no more money to give. The overseers closed their books and the poor assembled before my door, while I was in bed, asking for advice and food.
Mr Jeston, witness statement, October 1832
Source B: A popular publication criticises the system of outdoor relief.
Is not the allowance system a great hardship to the industrious man, making him no better off than the laziest fellow? Is it not a hardship that his idle neighbour, because he chooses to marry and have a large family, is sure of being highly paid from his parish funds, whilst the man who is willing to work can find no one to employ him, even at the lowest rate? By the system of allowance, the labourer is not rewarded by his character, but he is either reduced to unfairly low wages, or receives, as a charity from his parish, what should be paid him as the price of his work by his employer.
The Saturday Magazine, article, 15 June 1833
Source C: When giving evidence to the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, a resident in Cambridgeshire describes the actions of paupers to their local overseer of the poor.
The tone of the paupers towards the overseers is generally very insolent and often assumes even a more fearful character. At Great Gransden, the overseer’s wife told me that two paupers came to her husband demanding an increase of allowance. He refused, showing them that they had had the full allowance. They swore and threatened he should think again and, such was their violence, that she called them back and persuaded her husband to make them a further allowance. At Guilden Morden, a burning of ricks belonging to the overseer, Mr Butterfield, took place to the amount of £1,500 damage.
A farmer, witness statement, 1833
Source D: An Assistant Commissioner to the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws, reveals his assessment of the overseers in North Wales.
I found the overseers wholly incompetent to discharge the duties of their office, either from the interference of private occupations, or from a lack of experience and skill, most frequently both. Their object is to get through the year with as little unpopularity and trouble as possible. Their successors, therefore, have frequently to complain of demands left unsettled and rates uncollected. In rural districts, the overseers are farmers; in towns, generally shopkeepers; and in villages usually one of each of these classes.
S. Walcott, Appendix A in the Royal Commission’s Report, February 1834
[30]
Answer
