GROUP 11—SOCIETY
oath, to return, forthwith, the next straight way, to - the place where he was born, or where he last dwelt the space of three years, and there put himself to labour, like as a true man oughteth to do.”
If he was caught a second time begging while able to work, he must have a hole bored through the gristle of his right ear— the instruction in a later renewal of the statute being that the instrument must be a hot iron, and the size of the mutilation “ the compass of an inch about.” For a third defence he could be put to death, “ as a felon and enemy of the commonwealth.” Under the same statute “ all idle children ” over five years of age could be “ appointed to masters of industry, or other craft or labour, to be taught.”
When Slavery was a Punishment for the Saucy Child
These laws were made more stringent in the reign of Edward VI., the vagrant, for a first offence, being branded with the letter V ; for the second offence with the letter S (slave) ; and the third penalty was death. Anyone could take away the child of a “ loiterer and idle wanderer,” and bring it up till twenty, if a female child, and till twenty-four if a male, and appropriate the produce of its labours ; and if it should at any time resent chastisement by its master, the penalty was that it should remain a slave for life.
This statute, be it said, for the relief of that age from some measure of odium, only remained in force two years, but it shows the governing spirit of the period.
The punitive laws, with forced apprenticeship, and fixed wages for which every man must work when work was demanded of him, of course, proved ineffective, and presently—in the reign of Henry VIII.— arrangements were made for voluntary alms to be contributed for relief of the poor, after persuasion, on Sundays and holidays ; but, this being a failure, collections for “ the poor in very deed ” were made compulsory in the reign of Elizabeth, with possible imprisonment for non-compliance.
A Poor Law that Remained in Force fos;
Twenty-Three Decades
Later, shortly before the death of the great queen, the Poor Law, as it has been known ever since, was in essence established —that is to say, in each parish all the inhabitants were taxed compulsorily, overseers of the poor were appointed,. and arrangements for collecting and distributing the funds were made. Work was to be provided for those who could work, and
relief was to be given to those who could not work. Poor children were to be trained to some handicraft, and the idle were threatened with punishment. The difficulty, of course, was in finding work when workmen could not find it for themselves—and that difficulty was never overcome.
The Elizabethan law remained in force, with modifications, till 1834, but became less and less fitted to deal with the needs of the country as industrial conditions changed, until during fifty years preceding the Poor Law of 1834 it became gradually swamped by gross abuses. Early in the eighteenth century (1723) the distribution of the funds gathered under the overseers’ levy had become so unsound that indoor relief had to be insisted on as a safeguard, and the applicants were “ offered the House ” as a test of the reality of their poverty. The parish apprenticeship system became a scandal, and a law was passed for the protection of apprentices. But the full inadequacy of the scheme was not revealed until, towards the end of the eighteenth century, three great disturbing influences came simultaneously into operation.
The Changed Economic Conditions that Overthrew the Elizabethan Poor Law
These were, first, the Enclosure Acts, which dispossessed the rural labourers of their common rights and made them wholly dependent on their daily wage. The law that there should be four acres of land to every cottage was repealed. The change of the land into pasturage reduced the number of labourers needed, and' such as were left largely lost their share in the land through the Enclosure Acts. Between 1710 and 1760 only about three hundred thousand acres were enclosed from the commons, but between 1760 and 1843 nearly seven million acres were enclosed.
Simultaneously with this restriction of rural labour a second great change in urban employment and village industries was going, on through the invention of machinery and the use of steam. Hand labour of all kinds was superseded, and could not be absorbed by the new forms of manufacture, nor could it readily adapt itself to any of the requirements of the period. At the same time such labour as had a chance in the industrial Or agricultural market could not defend itself by combination, for all united action on the part of workmen was forbidden as conspiracy by \he law. This throwing- out of workmen, by shrinkage and change in employment, was accompanied, too, by a great rise in the
3767
oath, to return, forthwith, the next straight way, to - the place where he was born, or where he last dwelt the space of three years, and there put himself to labour, like as a true man oughteth to do.”
If he was caught a second time begging while able to work, he must have a hole bored through the gristle of his right ear— the instruction in a later renewal of the statute being that the instrument must be a hot iron, and the size of the mutilation “ the compass of an inch about.” For a third defence he could be put to death, “ as a felon and enemy of the commonwealth.” Under the same statute “ all idle children ” over five years of age could be “ appointed to masters of industry, or other craft or labour, to be taught.”
When Slavery was a Punishment for the Saucy Child
This statute, be it said, for the relief of that age from some measure of odium, only remained in force two years, but it shows the governing spirit of the period.
The punitive laws, with forced apprenticeship, and fixed wages for which every man must work when work was demanded of him, of course, proved ineffective, and presently—in the reign of Henry VIII.— arrangements were made for voluntary alms to be contributed for relief of the poor, after persuasion, on Sundays and holidays ; but, this being a failure, collections for “ the poor in very deed ” were made compulsory in the reign of Elizabeth, with possible imprisonment for non-compliance.
A Poor Law that Remained in Force fos;
Twenty-Three Decades
Later, shortly before the death of the great queen, the Poor Law, as it has been known ever since, was in essence established —that is to say, in each parish all the inhabitants were taxed compulsorily, overseers of the poor were appointed,. and arrangements for collecting and distributing the funds were made. Work was to be provided for those who could work, and
relief was to be given to those who could not work. Poor children were to be trained to some handicraft, and the idle were threatened with punishment. The difficulty, of course, was in finding work when workmen could not find it for themselves—and that difficulty was never overcome.
The Elizabethan law remained in force, with modifications, till 1834, but became less and less fitted to deal with the needs of the country as industrial conditions changed, until during fifty years preceding the Poor Law of 1834 it became gradually swamped by gross abuses. Early in the eighteenth century (1723) the distribution of the funds gathered under the overseers’ levy had become so unsound that indoor relief had to be insisted on as a safeguard, and the applicants were “ offered the House ” as a test of the reality of their poverty. The parish apprenticeship system became a scandal, and a law was passed for the protection of apprentices. But the full inadequacy of the scheme was not revealed until, towards the end of the eighteenth century, three great disturbing influences came simultaneously into operation.
The Changed Economic Conditions that Overthrew the Elizabethan Poor Law
These were, first, the Enclosure Acts, which dispossessed the rural labourers of their common rights and made them wholly dependent on their daily wage. The law that there should be four acres of land to every cottage was repealed. The change of the land into pasturage reduced the number of labourers needed, and' such as were left largely lost their share in the land through the Enclosure Acts. Between 1710 and 1760 only about three hundred thousand acres were enclosed from the commons, but between 1760 and 1843 nearly seven million acres were enclosed.
Simultaneously with this restriction of rural labour a second great change in urban employment and village industries was going, on through the invention of machinery and the use of steam. Hand labour of all kinds was superseded, and could not be absorbed by the new forms of manufacture, nor could it readily adapt itself to any of the requirements of the period. At the same time such labour as had a chance in the industrial Or agricultural market could not defend itself by combination, for all united action on the part of workmen was forbidden as conspiracy by \he law. This throwing- out of workmen, by shrinkage and change in employment, was accompanied, too, by a great rise in the
3767
