Why was there a problem with catering for the poor?
In the 20th century, widespread provisions were finally made for poor relief, protecting those who were unwell, elderly and unemployed. Early developments in providing for the poor were based on those who were considered ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’, ideas which are still prevalent in modern society. The Reformation and the dissolution of the monasteries removed the poor relief within parishes. Normally, the poor were cared for by members of the church, such as monks and nuns, and parish guilds through their alms houses. However, this type of support was no longer available once the monasteries and chantries had been dissolved in the mid-16th century. As a result, more people were on the streets begging, another traditional form of funding the poor, which raised concerns about the problem of vagrancy. Since the start of the Tudor dynasty, there were concerns about vagabonds. In 1495, Henry VII issued An Act Against Vagabonds and Beggars, which asserted that idle persons were to be placed in the stocks for three days and then be sent away.[1] It was not until 1601, right at the end of the Tudor dynasty, that an act was published with sufficient measures for helping the poor.
Were there any attempts to solve the problem before 1601?
There were attempts throughout the Tudor period to address problems relating to the poor. However, early acts were more concerned with vagabonds and punishing those who were considered idle. The poor were divided into two categories: the deserving, those incapable of work who were ill, disabled or old, and the undeserving, the able-bodied who were unemployed. The 1531 Vagabonds Act established that only those with a license could beg. This license was reserved for the elderly and disabled. If anyone who was able-bodied was caught outside of the hundred where they were born, or had resided for three years before, they would be whipped.[2] The 1536 Act for the Punishment of Sturdy Vagabonds extended this act, asserting that first time offenders would be whipped, those caught a second time would be whipped again and lose part of their right ear, and the third offence would result in death.[3] The government were more concerned with punishing vagrants than helping the unemployed poor to find work.
Legislation for the poor began to progress in the Tudor era as the government began to consider suitable alternatives to monastic charity. The parish became responsible for managing the poor; from 1536, office holders and churchwardens were responsible for collecting alms for the poor.[4] Moreover, the 1552 bill stated that parishes must create a register of the poor and could use taxes to raise funds for those deserving of poor relief, namely the old, young or ill. It also introduced roles for collecting this money. The 1572 Act combined the punishment of vagrants along with these rulings about the relief of the poor and impotent. The role of overseer of the poor was introduced to monitor the paupers within the parish. Finally, in 1598, an Act was passed which laid out many of the ideas that would be include in its successor: The 1601 Poor Law.
What did the 1601 Poor Law actually do?
The Poor Law of 1601 acted as a unification of all these attempts to move away from begging and help the poor. It established that the parish was responsible for overseeing poor relief. The churchwardens and overseers of the Poor were to ensure that this relief was carried out and monitored. Through taxation, the parish would earn money to purchase flax, hemp, wool, thread, iron and other necessities to ensure work for those who were able-bodied. However, if a pauper was able but refused to work, they would be sent to a house of correction. The money that was earned would also go towards the relief of the lame, impotent, old and blind who were unable to work. Pauper children would be made apprentices. If the churchwardens or overseers neglected their office or orders, they would be fined twenty shillings. The historian John Pound states that the Act of 1601 saw the completion of more than a century of experiment, ranging from the brutally repressive to the enlightened and far sighted.[5]
How was the law implemented?
The Act did not have an immediate impact on poor relief. Although most of the larger towns had poor rates by 1600, rural parishes rarely did. Rural parishes did start appointing overseers, following pressures from justices of the peace, but this took nearly two decades and did not ensure they had rates.[6] Furthermore, another law was passed in 1610 to ensure houses of correction were built in every county for idle and disorderly persons.[7] This act perhaps suggests that attempts to curb idle behaviour by providing work within the parish were ineffective. There were also concerns about which parish was responsible for a pauper’s poor relief. It was not until the 1662 Settlement Act that this problem was resolved.[8] Nonetheless, the Law of 1601, later known as the Old Poor Law, would remain the foundation of poor relief until the 19th century, when the highly contested New Poor Law of 1834 was introduced.
By Elena Rossi. Elena is a Citizens Project intern and has recently completed her MA in Medieval Studies at Royal Holloway, University of London.
[1] The Statutes of the Realm: Printed by Command of his Majesty King George the Third, in Pursuance of an Address of the House of Commons of Great Britain, 11 vols (London: Dawsons of Pall Mall, 1810-1828), II, p. 569.
[2] The Statutes of the Realm, III, pp. 328-332.
[3] The Statutes of the Realm, III, pp. 558-562.
[4] The Statutes of the Realm, III, p. 559.
[5] John Pound, Poverty and Vagrancy in Tudor England, 2nd edn (London: Longman, 1986), p. 55.
[6] Paul Slack, The English Poor Law, 1531-1782 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 170
[7] The Statutes of the Realm, IV part 2, p. 1160.
[8] Slack, p. 54.
