The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Early History of English Poor Relief, by E. M. Leonard This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. Title: The Early History of English Poor Relief Author: E. M. Leonard Release Date: March 26, 2019 [EBook #59129] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLISH POOR RELIEF *** Produced by MWS, Christopher Wright and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive) THE EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLISH POOR RELIEF London: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE. Glasgow: 50, WELLINGTON STREET. Leipzig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. New York: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. Bombay: E. SEYMOUR HALE. EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLISH POOR RELIEF BY E. M. LEONARD, FORMER STUDENT OF GIRTON COLLEGE. CAMBRIDGE: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 1900 [All Rights reserved.] Cambridge: PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. TO THE REV. WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, D.D., LL.D. FELLOW AND LECTURER IN TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF MANY KINDNESSES I DEDICATE THIS BOOK. T PREFACE. he present account of the early history of English poor relief is chiefly derived from the municipal records of London and Norwich and from the reports of the justices of the peace which are included amongst the state papers. Information on the subject is also contained in the Privy Council Register, while some of the orders of both Privy Council and justices and a few of the overseers' accounts are to be found in the collections of the British Museum. A fairly effectual system of relieving the destitute by public authority has had in England a continuous existence since the seventeenth century. Attempts to found such a system of poor relief in the sixteenth century were common to most of the countries of Western Europe, but the continued existence of any organisation of the kind is peculiar to England. Possibly this fact has an important influence on our national history. We are apt to consider the facts that we are a law- abiding people and that we have not suffered from violent revolutions to be entirely due to the virtues of the national character and the excellence of the British Constitution. But before the introduction of our system of relieving the poor we were by no means so free from disorder. The poor laws themselves were at least partly police measures, and, until they were successfully administered, the country was repeatedly disturbed by rebellions and constantly plagued by vagrants. The connection between the relief of the poor and orderly government in England appears fully during the course of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and it may be that our legal system of poor relief has ever since contributed to the absence of violent catastrophes in our national history. But although the continuous existence of a system of public poor relief for nearly three centuries is peculiar to England, the English organisation was at first only one of a series of similar systems which began to arise during the sixteenth century in most of the countries of Europe. Both in England and on the continent, however, poor laws were difficult to administer. On the continent they fell gradually into abeyance, and the English system of poor relief was by no means enforced simply because a poor law was passed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It survived almost alone among the similar organisations of the time chiefly in consequence of the policy adopted by the Privy Council in the reign of Charles I. and of the efforts made by English justices of the peace as a result of that policy. For nearly a century before the time of Charles I., however, experiments had been made in the organisation of public poor relief. Efforts in this direction were first undertaken by the towns, and the provisions of the earlier English poor laws appear to have been modelled on pre-existing municipal regulations. The City of London was apparently the first English secular authority to organise the public relief of the poor. Collections by the aldermen at the church doors were decreed by the Court of Aldermen in 1532: compulsory taxation was levied by the Common Council as early as 1547, while the Bishop and citizens persuaded Edward VI. to grant the royal palace of Bridewell for the creation of the first House of Correction. Before 1569 legislation also had been fashioned upon these pre-existing orders and bye-laws of the towns, but neither statutes nor municipal orders were successful. Statute succeeded statute throughout the sixteenth century; during the years 1594 to 1597, however, there was great scarcity of corn and provisions; the poor died from starvation or rose in insurrection. The whole question of poor relief was in consequence thoroughly thrashed out in Parliament. Bacon and Burleigh, Whitgift and Raleigh took part in the debates. A great committee appointed in 1597 held its meetings in the Middle Temple Hall, and there Bacon, Coke, and the most distinguished men in the House discussed at least thirteen bills on the subject. This committee finally rejected all the bills referred to them in favour of a new bill drafted by themselves which finally passed into law. This was practically re-enacted in 1601 and has remained in force until our own time as the basis of our organisation for the relief of the poor. But the question of poor relief was not settled by statutory enactment any more than by municipal regulations. Administration and not legislation has always been the difficulty in laws concerning the poor. Until the end of the sixteenth century the history of relief in England is parallel to that of France and Scotland; there were in all three countries many poor laws but none were well administered. But in the time of Charles I. the machinery for the execution of the law is developed, and henceforward the history of poor relief in England differs from that of the neighbouring countries. The machinery for the execution of the law is created by means of the pressure of the Privy Council on the justices of the peace. Even in the reign of Elizabeth the Privy Council had occasionally issued orders with the object of enforcing the poor law. But from 1629 to 1640 the Privy Council under the personal government of Charles I. interfered constantly and regularly in the matter. The Council attempted to provide work for the unemployed, to procure cheap corn in years of scarcity, and to regulate wages in the supposed interests of the workmen. It also established a new organisation for the ordinary relief of the poor. In 1631 the justices still neglected to execute the laws for the poor, but the Book of Orders issued in that year ordered special meetings to be held and reports to be sent to the Privy Council. Nearly a thousand of these reports remain, and in these we are told that in many districts of the kingdom the execution of the law so improved that it became part of the practice as well as of the law of the land. Moreover the whole of the Elizabethan Poor Law was administered: work was provided for the unemployed, as well as pensions for the impotent. In most places in south-eastern England, and in some districts of almost every county, sums were levied in order that materials and tools might be furnished to the unemployed. Thus during the personal government of Charles I. we have not only the first thorough execution of the poor law, but a more complete organisation for the help of the weaker classes than at any other period of our history. The system thus established was successful in meeting the temporary difficulties of the time. Some Shropshire justices worked "such effect" by the execution of the Book of Orders that "there have not any rogues or vagabonds appeared amongst us or walked abroad as wee heare of since our first meetings." There were also no complaints from the impotent poor, and the unemployed were set to work. There are similar accounts from many different parts of the country which show that the administration of the Poor Law had then much to do with making England a law-abiding and orderly community. But the outbreak of the Civil War rendered the finding of work for the unemployed less necessary, and broke up the organisation established by the Book of Orders. There are no reports after 1640, and probably the special meetings of the justices were discontinued. The whole of the poor law was laxly administered and only in a few places did this provision for the unemployed outlast the Commonwealth. Still a part of the poor law survived and has a continuous history from the time of Henry VIII. In Scotland and France either the central government was not so vigilant, or there were no efficient local officials, and in both these countries therefore regulations for the relief of the poor were issued but were not effectually executed. The English organisation alone survived, and this probably in consequence of the enforcement of the Book of Orders under the personal government of Charles I. During my investigations I have received valuable assistance. To the Rev. Dr Cunningham of Trinity College, Cambridge, I am especially grateful for much kindly advice and criticism. I began my researches into this subject while I was a student of the London School of Economics and desire to express my obligations to Mr Hewins, the Director of the School, who first suggested the subject to me, and also pointed out to me some of the printed sources of information. I also thank Mr Hubert Hall of the Public Record Office for the ready kindness with which he has always helped me. Mr Tigny of the Norwich muniment room, Dr Sharpe of the Guildhall Record Office, and the officials of the British Museum and Public Record Office have also courteously assisted me while I was investigating the manuscripts under their care. My thanks are also due to Mr S. H. Leonard of Lincoln's Inn, Mr J. L. Burbey of Exeter College, and Miss Maud Syson of Girton College. I desire also to express my gratitude to Mr Loch, Sec. of the C. O. S., who, on behalf of the Syndics of the University Press, made several suggestions of which I have been glad to avail myself. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. THE BEGINNING OF THE SECULAR CONTROL OF POOR RELIEF. § 1. Anglo-Saxon times. § 2. The Labour statutes. § 3. The control of charitable funds by the state. § 4. The control of charitable funds by the towns. § 5. Summary of the main features of public control of poor-relief before the sixteenth century pp. 1-10 CHAPTER II. THE CAUSES OF THE REORGANISATION OF POOR RELIEF. § 1. Increase of vagrants. § 2. Reasons for increase of beggars. § 3. Old methods of charity. § 4. Attempts to reorganise charitable funds on the Continent. § 5. Three factors in the making of the English system of poor relief pp. 11-21 CHAPTER III. 1514—1569. POOR RELIEF IN THE TOWNS. § 1. Importance of municipal government in Tudor towns. § 2. London regulations for a constant supply of corn, 1391- 1569. § 3. Regulations for the repression of vagrants and the relief of the poor, 1514-1536. § 4. Refoundation of St Bartholomew's Hospital and imposition of a compulsory poor rate, 1536-1547. § 5. Completion of the Four Royal Hospitals and establishment of a municipal system of poor relief in London, 1547-1557. § 6. Failure of the municipal system of London. § 7. Provision of corn in Bristol and Canterbury. § 8. Lincoln. Survey of poor; and arrangements for finding work for the unemployed. § 9. Ipswich. Survey of poor; imposition of compulsory poor rate and foundation of Christ's Hospital. § 10. Cambridge. Survey of poor and assessment of parishioners. § 11. Summary pp. 22-46 CHAPTER IV. 1514—1569. THE PRIVY COUNCIL AND PARLIAMENT. § 1. Efforts made by the Government to secure the employment of the clothmakers during the crisis in the cloth trade of 1527-8. § 2. Regulations for the supply of the markets with corn, 1527-8. § 3. Similar action in regard to corn in 1548 and 1563. § 4. Letters of the Privy Council to particular local officials in connection with the relief of the poor. § 5. Legislation concerning the relief of the poor during the reign of Henry VIII. § 6. The two earlier statutes of Edward VI. § 7. Legislation between 1551 and 1569. § 8. Summary pp. 47-60 CHAPTER V. REVIEW OF THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POOR RELIEF, 1514—1569. § 1. The action of municipal rulers precedes the action of Parliament. § 2. Advantages of the municipal system of relief. § 3. Connection between the municipal organisation of poor relief and the dissolution of the monasteries. § 4. Relation of beggary to the first schemes of relief. § 5. Parental government. § 6. Bridewell, the key-stone of the system pp. 61-66 CHAPTER VI. 1569—1597. PARLIAMENT AND THE PRIVY COUNCIL. A. Parliamentary History. § 1. Discussions, Bills and Statutes between 1566 and 1576. § 2. Parliamentary history between 1576 and 1597. § 3. The Bills and Statutes of 1597. § 4. General features of the discussion in Parliament. B. The action of the Privy Council. § 5. The chief characteristics of the action of the Privy Council. § 6. The whipping campaign. § 7. The scarcity measures. § 8. The influence of the Privy Council on county and municipal officials pp. 67-94 CHAPTER VII. 1569—1597. THE MEASURES OF THE TOWNS AND THE EVENTS OF THE YEARS 1594-1597. § 1. The organisation of London with regard to the poor. § 2. The organisation of Norwich. § 3. The action of other towns (1) concerning the settlement of new comers; (2) concerning the unemployed; (3) concerning the raising of funds. § 4. The events of the years of scarcity 1594-1597. § 5. Summary of the period 1569-1597 pp. 95-131 CHAPTER VIII. 1597—1644. PARLIAMENT AND THE PRIVY COUNCIL. § 1. Characteristics of the period. § 2. Legislation from 1597 to 1644. Administrative machinery. § 3. Action of the Privy Council before 1629. § 4. Action of the Privy Council after 1629 with regard to the provision of corn. § 5. Action of the Privy Council after 1629 with regard to the unemployed. § 6. The Book of Orders as a whole and the royal commission of 1630/-1. § 7. Interference with wages as a method of helping the poor. § 8. Summary pp. 132-164 CHAPTER IX. 1597—1644. THE LOCAL MACHINERY FOR ADMINISTRATION. § 1. Powers of the justices. § 2. Work of the justices in first putting the law in execution (a) in the West Riding during 1598, (b) in the North Riding during the years immediately following 1605. § 3. Reports of the justices in response to the Book of Orders. § 4. The work of the judges: (a) Authoritative decisions on points of law; (b) Administrative work as the link between the Privy Council and the justices. § 5. The work of the overseers (a) in 1599; (b) when stirred to greater activity by scarcity measures; (c) after the issue of the Book of Orders pp. 165-183 CHAPTER X. METHODS OF RELIEF, 1597—1644. A. In times of emergency. § 1. The methods by which the scarcity orders of the Privy Council were executed in 1623 and 1630-1: (a) the suppression of alehouses and restriction of malting; (b) the regulations for serving the markets with corn; (c) selling corn to labourers under price; (d) other methods of providing food for the poor. § 2. Evidence as to the success or failure of the corn regulations. § 3. Reasons for adopting them. § 4. Bearing of the scarcity measures on the history of poor relief, (a) because of the growth of organisation; (b) as an indication of the standard of life of the poorer classes. § 5. Provision of fuel for the poor in winter. § 6. Help afforded in times of plague and sickness. § 7. Contributions to sufferers from fire. § 8. Two characteristics of seventeenth century poor relief: (a) little distinction between paupers and non-paupers; (b) little distinction between relief afforded by voluntary contributions and that provided by poor rates pp. 184-205 B. Ordinary relief. α. Impotent Poor. § 1. Almshouses and endowed charities. § 2. Relief for the old from county and parochial rates. β. Children. § 3. Apprenticeship. § 4. Schools for little children and orphanages. γ. Able-bodied poor. § 5. Relief given to prisoners. § 6. Provision of funds to provide work for the unemployed. § 7. Methods of providing work: (a) Stocks used to employ the poor in their homes; (b) Introduction of new trades; (c) Workhouses and Jersey schools; (d) Bridewells; (e) Emigration; (f) Pressure on employers; (g) Advancement of capital without interest pp. 206-236 CHAPTER XII. 1597—1644. THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE POOR LAW AS A WHOLE. § 1. Importance of the period 1597—1644. § 2. Negligent administration of the Poor Law in the North and extreme West. § 3. Administration in the rest of England varied with the action of the Privy Council. § 4. Action of the Privy Council and administration between 1597 and 1605. § 5. Action of the Privy Council and administration between 1605 and 1629. § 6. Action of the Privy Council and administration between 1629 and 1644. § 7. Improvement effected in 1631 especially concerned the unemployed. § 8. Detailed report from Bassetlaw. § 9. Provision for the unemployed (a) in the North and extreme West; (b) in the towns; (c) in the Western counties; (d) in the Eastern counties. § 10. Summary pp. 237-266 CHAPTER XIII. POOR RELIEF IN FRANCE, SCOTLAND, AND ENGLAND DURING THE CIVIL WAR AND COMMONWEALTH. § 1. Lax administration of poor relief in England during the years of Civil War. (a) Decline of charitable institutions; (b) Neglect in execution of ordinary law; (c) Instances of corrupt practices. § 2. Attempts to regain a good organisation of poor relief under the Commonwealth. § 3. Reasons why disorganisation especially affected the provision of work for the unemployed. § 4. State of poor relief after the Restoration. § 5. Reasons for the failure to restore the old state of things during the Commonwealth. § 6. History of legislation on poor relief in Scotland (a) before 1597; (b) between 1597—1680. § 7. Failure of administration of poor relief in Scotland during the seventeenth century. (a) Responses of the Scotch justices to the orders of Council in 1623 show that they were unable or unwilling to enforce the Poor Law themselves, and left it to the kirk sessions; (b) Inadequate poor relief granted by the kirk sessions of Banff; (c) Relief of the poor in Aberdeen shows that the relief considered sufficient by the municipal rulers was double that which could be granted from the funds at the disposal of the kirk sessions; (d) Infrequency of assessment in Scotland before 1818; (e) Insufficiency of relief during the years 1692—1699; (f) Prevalence of begging in Scotland; (g) Reasons for the failure of Scotch administration. § 8. The history of poor relief in France. § 9. Comparison between the history of poor relief in England and that in France and in Scotland pp. 267-292 CHAPTER XIV. CONCLUSIONS. § 1. Summary of history of English poor relief before the Civil War. § 2. The political significance of the paternal measures of the Government. (a) Possible attempt to attach to the Government the poorer part of the nation; (b) Habitual use of proclamations and orders in Council for a popular purpose. § 3. Success of the enforcement of the Book of Orders in the reign of Charles I. § 4. Results of the effectual administration of the Poor Law on English social history pp. 293-304 APPENDICES. Appendix I. Extracts from the Journals of the Common Council of London. A. Copy of a precept issued for a collection for the poor issued in 1563. Journals XVIII. f. 145 b p. 305 B. Copy in the Journals of a precept for a collection in February 1573/4. Journals XX. I. f. 119 pp. 306-307 Appendix II. Extract from the census of the poor taken at Norwich recorded in the "Maioris Bocke for the Pore" pp. 308-310 Appendix III. Extracts from the "Orders for the poor" drawn up in Norwich, May 1571: pp. 311-315 Orders for the poor, p. 311; for the balie of Bridewell, p. 312; orders for children and others in wardes, p. 313; orders for the deacons, p. 314. The Book for the Poore, Norwich. Appendix IV. Report concerning scarcity from Norfolk, 1586. Dom. State Papers Queen Eliz., Vol. 191, No. 12 pp. 316-317 Appendix V. Part of a draft of orders for remedying the scarcity of corn in 1586. Lans. MSS. Brit. Mus. No. 48, f. 128 pp. 318-326 Appendix VI. Accounts of the Churchwardens and Overseers of the parish of Staplegrove, co. Somerset, for the year 1599. Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 30, 278 pp. 327-330 Appendix VII. Orders made by the justices responsible for Aylesham and Reipham, co. Norfolk, 23rd October 1622. Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. No. 12496, f. 222 pp. 331-333 Appendix VIII. Report of the justices from Lackford and the half hundred of Exning, February 7th, 1622/3. Dom. State Papers James I., Vol. 142. 14. I pp. 334-335 Appendix IX. Extract from the Privy Council Register. Copy of a letter sent to the Deputy Lieutenants and Justices of the Counties of Suffolk and Essex concerning the employment of the Poor. Privy Council Register Chas. I., Vol. V. f. 263. 22nd May 1629 pp. 336-337 Appendix X. Letter concerning the restoration of order and relief of the poor in Rutland. Privy Council Register, Vol. VI. f. 345. 15th Feb. 1630/1 pp. 338-339 Appendix XI. Letter from Sir Thomas Barrington concerning the eight hundreds of Yorkshire. Vol. 177, No. 31. 21st Dec. 1630 pp. 340-341 Appendix XII. Justices' reports on the execution of the Book of Orders of January 1630/1 p. 342 A. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 188, No. 85. Question asked by the justices responsible for the division of Fawley, Hants pp. 342-344 B. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 189, No. 80 and Vol. 197, No. 69. Extracts from two reports from the hundred of Braughing concerning proceedings from Feb. 7th 1630/1 to June 27th, 1631 pp. 344-351 C. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 190, No. 10. Part of the Report of Bridewell, 2nd May 1631 pp. 351-356 D. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 191, No. 42. Report concerning Guildford, 7th May 1631 pp. 357-358 E. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 216, No. 45. Report of the justices of Cambridge for the Hundreds of Chesterton, Papworth and North Stow, May 13, 1632 pp. 358-360 F. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 226, No. 78. Part of the certificate of the justices of Middlesex for the Finsbury division concerning the sums received from penalties levied on alehouse keepers in 1630, 1631, 1632 pp. 360-361 G. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 349, No. 86. Part of the certificate from Bassetlaw, co. Notts., 10th March 1636/7 pp. 361-365 H. Dom. State Papers Chas. I., Vol. 395, No. 55. Certificate concerning the Book of Orders from Loes, Wilford, Thredling and Plomesgate, 14 July 1638 pp. 365-366 Appendix XIII. The division of the monies collected for the poor January 1642/3 in Norwich. Add MSS. Brit. Mus. No. 22619, f. 11 pp. 367-368 Appendix XIV. Report of the Four Royal Hospitals, 1645. King's Pamphlets 669, f. 10, No. 2 pp. 369-370 Appendix XV. Ordinance of the Lords for putting in execution the laws for the relief of the poor. King's Pamphlets 669, f. 9, No. 81 p. 371 ERRATA AND CORRIGENDA. P. 50, n. 106. For Amysbury read Amesbury, for Boscum read Boscombe, for Alyngton read Allington and for Fiddelldene read Figheldean. P. 102, n. 224, p. 106, n. 234, p. 142, n. 316 for Maiores Booke for the Poore read Maioris Bocke for the Pore. P. 118, l. 18. For Twiford read Twyford. P. 168, l. 10. For Arkesey read Arksey. P. 169, n. 384. For Dewisburie read Dewsbury, for Shelfe read Shelf, and for Northowrom read Northowram. P. 170, n. 387. For Thirske read Thirsk. P. 173, l. 22. For Fropfield read Froxfield. P. 214, n. 510. For Easbie read Easby. Note. P. 141, n. 312. The decision of Lord Romer was reversed by the Court of Appeal on March 7th, 1900; it was decided that the Guardians were not entitled to relieve the colliers during a strike. THE EARLY HISTORY OF ENGLISH POOR RELIEF. Introduction. 1. Anglo-Saxon times. 2. Labour statutes. CHAPTER I. THE BEGINNING OF THE SECULAR CONTROL OF POOR RELIEF. 1. Anglo-Saxon times. 2. The Labour Statutes. 3. The regulation of charitable funds by the state. 4. The control of charitable funds by the towns. 5. Summary of the main features of public control of poor relief before the sixteenth century. The English system of Poor Relief presents a striking contrast to the rest of our national institutions. In most departments of our social organisation, public control is less extensive in England than in the other countries of Western Europe. But, in regard to the relief of the poor, we have adopted an opposite policy. Since the reign of Charles I., Englishmen have made themselves responsible for the maintenance of those who are destitute. All, who cannot obtain food or shelter for themselves or from their nearest relatives, have a right to relief from compulsory rates levied upon the rest of the community. It will be our object, in the following pages, to trace the growth of this system. We will examine the causes which led the public authorities of state and town to control the relief of the poor, and the steps which they took to render its administration effective and successful. There can be no doubt, that an organisation of this kind was not suddenly imposed by a single Act of Parliament. Under Henry VIII., the first enactment was passed ordering the regular collection and distribution of alms for the relief of the poor , but it was not until forty years later that the amount to be paid by each individual was assessed and its payment compulsorily enforced , while even after ninety years had elapsed, the English organisation of poor relief was still irregularly carried out and of little practical effect . Like other and more famous English institutions, the making and administration of the English Poor Law was a growth, not a creation. It was during the sixteenth and early part of the seventeenth centuries that the chief experiments were made in methods of relieving the poor by secular public authorities. But, even before that time, the beginnings of the later organisation may be traced both in the provisions of the statutes and in the regulations of the towns. We will now briefly consider the chief ways in which public secular authorities interfered in the relief of the poor before the sixteenth century. In Anglo-Saxon times, the administration of poor relief was almost entirely under the control of the Church. Almsgiving and hospitality were however inculcated as religious duties of considerable importance, and there is much to make us think that they were extensively practised by Anglo-Saxon kings and noblemen. Bede tells the following story of King Oswald. He was about to dine sumptuously from a silver dish of dainties one Easter day, when the servant who distributed relief to the poor came before him, and told him that there were many needy persons outside the gate, who were begging some alms of the king. The king left the dish untasted and ordered the contents to be carried to the beggars . This story incidentally lets us see that a distribution of alms and a special servant for the purpose were part of the regular organisation of the household. King Alfred also, we are told, "bestowed alms and largesses on both natives and foreigners of all countries ," and it was the custom of the Anglo-Saxon kings to keep open house for several days and to entertain all comers three times a year, at Christmas, Easter and Whitsuntide. But the greater part of the relief of the time was administered by ecclesiastics. Some help was given to the poor in famous abbeys like those of Ely, Croyland and Glastonbury , and there were the offerings distributed by the priests. The nearest approach we have to state interference with the relief of the poor is found in the law of Ethelred, which probably enforced the existing custom with regard to tithe. One third part "of the tithe which belonged to the Church" was to be given to "Gods poor and needy men in thraldom ." But, from the beginning of the thirteenth century, we find greater activity in the matter. Two causes seem to have influenced the secular public authorities of the time to interfere; first, the desire to repress vagrants, and secondly, the wish of state and town to control some of the charitable endowments. Many of the regulations, made with the object of repressing vagrants and able-bodied beggars, were closely connected with the statutes concerning labour, enacted from the middle of the fourteenth century onwards. After the Black Death of 1348-9, labourers were scarce and wages rose rapidly; a series of enactments was therefore passed, designed to force every able-bodied man to work, and to keep wages at the old level. In the first regulation of this kind, the Ordinance of Labourers of 1349, the first step is taken towards the national control of poor relief. The proclamation restrains the liberty of the giver; the private individual may no longer give to whom he chooses. It is provided that no one is to give relief to able-bodied beggars, and the ground of the prohibition is expressly stated to be "that they may be compelled to labour for their necessary living." The first provision of funds for the relief of the poor made by law, is embodied in one of the same series of labour statutes. The wages of priests were regulated and it was ordered that the fines of those parishioners who paid more than the statutory rate, should be given to the poor . Almost as soon as these labour statutes were passed, we hear that labourers fled from county to county in order to elude the operation of the law . The workmen adopted many devices, in order to escape from any part of the country where these regulations were enforced. Some seem to have pretended to be crippled and diseased, and so, when undetected, could wander and beg with impunity. Others, apparently, joined bands of pilgrims, like the famous travellers from the Tabard to Canterbury, and, journeying with them, would reach a district, where they could obtain good wages and be [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] 3. Control of charitable endowments by the State. 4. Control of charitable endowments by the town. undisturbed by the execution of the labour laws. In 1388, therefore, regulations were made, restricting the movements, not only of able-bodied beggars, but of all beggars and of all labourers and, at the same time, admitting the right to relief of those who were unable to work for themselves . Servants who wished to depart from the hundred in which they lived, under colour of going a pilgrimage, or in order to serve or dwell elsewhere, were to have a letter, stating the cause of their journey and the time when they were to return, duly signed by the "good man of the hundred" appointed for the purpose. If they were found away from their district, without a letter of this kind, they were to be placed in the stocks and kept there, until they found surety to return to their own neighbourhood. However, a servant who had a certain engagement with a master in another part of the country, was always to be allowed to have a letter, allowing him freely to depart. Thus the statute prevented a man from wandering about in search of work, but did not prevent him from migrating, when an engagement was already concluded. All these regulations affected beggars: an able-bodied beggar who begged without a letter was to be put in the stocks in the same manner as a labourer without a letter. He could not escape by pretending that he was a labourer, because both were liable to punishment. Neither could he elude the vigilance of the law, by pretending to be disabled, because the impotent poor also were forbidden to wander; they were to stay where they were at the passing of the Act, or, if the people there were unable to support them, were to go, within forty days, to other towns in the same hundred or to the place where they were born. This statute is often regarded as the first English poor law, because it recognises that the impotent poor had a right to relief, and because it carefully distinguishes between them and the able-bodied beggars. The provisions also imply the responsibility of every neighbourhood for the support of its own poor. Moreover, this enactment may be regarded as a law of settlement. Not only were the impotent poor confined to their own district, but all unlicensed labourers were likewise forbidden to migrate. Probably the Act had little effect because it was too stringent to have been enforced. Not only Parliament, but the municipal rulers also, made regulations for the restraint of vagabonds. The authorities of the City of London, in 1359 and in 1375, forbade any able-bodied person to beg, and at the end of the fifteenth century the constables were ordered to search, not only for the vagabonds themselves, but also for the people who harboured them . Two statutes relating to beggars and vagabonds were passed in the reign of Henry VII. , but in both the severity of the punishment was decreased, because the king wished by "softer meanes" to reduce them to obedience. The decrease in the severity of this punishment seems to show that there was as yet little sign of the crowds of vagrants, who were a terror to the country under Henry VIII. So far the wanderers were men who had no difficulty in obtaining work, but who wanted better terms. Under Henry VIII. they include also unemployed labourers, and the legislation dealing with them concerns the provision of work for the able-bodied as well as assistance for the impotent poor; still the regulations concerning vagrants were already connected with the relief of the poor because the efforts made to keep at work the valiant beggars had made it necessary to distinguish between them and the old and disabled, and had led to some provision being made for those really unable to help themselves. But there was another cause for the public regulation of the relief of the necessitous. From the thirteenth century onwards there are signs that men had ceased to leave charitable endowments entirely in the hands of ecclesiastics. A growing desire was felt, that Parliament and Town Governments should share in the administration of some of the funds for the relief of the poor. We find indications of this both in the statutes and in the action of the burgesses. Almost at the same time that the statute of 1388 ordered beggars to remain in their own neighbourhood, another statute of Richard II. was passed which regulated the revenues of the Church in the interests of the poor. A portion of the tithe had been commonly distributed by the resident rector to the poor , but, when a living became part of the possessions of a monastery, the poor parishioners were often forgotten. In order therefore that the parishioners might not be injured, this enactment provided that when the revenues of a living were appropriated by a monastery, a portion of the revenue should be assigned to the poor, so that they might not lose the alms formerly distributed by the rectors . Under Henry IV. this statute was re-enacted, and it was ordered that appropriations made since the 15 Rich. II. should be reformed . The earlier statute had thus probably not been well observed: the second was apparently more successful, for in The Complaynt of Roderyck Mors, written in 1542, it is stated that "if the personage were improperd, the monkes were bound to deale almesse to the poore and to kepe hospitalyte as the writings of the gyftes of such personages and landes do playnly declare ." In any case this legislation indicates a desire on the part of the state to interfere, in order to reform the administration of ecclesiastical revenues in the interest of the poor. In the towns also, the civic governors and the guilds began to control some of the endowments for the relief of the poor. Even in Anglo-Saxon times, the distribution of alms formed part of the functions of the guilds, and it is not unlikely that it was partly owing to customs formed by the municipal rulers through their association in guilds that the towns began to take an active part in the administration of poor relief. Thus at Lynn, one of the ordinances of the town guild provided that relief should be given to any brother in poverty, either from the common fund or from the private purses of the guild brothers. A piece of land was bequeathed to the guild, partly for the purpose of relieving the poor, and, we are told, £30 a year was distributed to the poor brethren, to blind, lame and sick persons, and for other charitable purposes. The whole charity distributed by this association must have been considerable, for though only four great meetings of the guild were held during the year, one of these was especially concerned with the management of its charities . At Sandwich also , the burgesses or the town rulers controlled the two hospitals dedicated respectively to St Bartholomew and St John. Both were virtually almshouses providing for a certain number of old people. The Mayor and Jurats of Sandwich, not only appointed the governors of St Bartholomew's, but audited the accounts, controlled the management and appointed new recipients of the charity. The whole was connected with an annual festal procession to the hospital in which many of the townsfolk took part . At other times, the municipalities, not only exercised control over institutions founded by private people, but also themselves contributed to the endowments. At Scarborough, Henry de Bulmer gave a site for St Thomas hospital which was finished [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] 5. Summary. and endowed by the burgesses . At Chester the town gave land, on condition that certain almshouses were built ; and Ipswich in 1469 granted the profits of St James' fair to the lazars . At Lydd, sums were given for "Goderynges dowghetyr, pour mayde, for hosyne, shoys and other thyngses" and payments were made for her clothes and keep on several occasions . In this town also gifts of corn were regularly distributed at Easter and Christmas from 1439 onwards . In most of the great towns the Chamberlain was the especial guardian of orphans , and sometimes there was a Court of Orphans in which matters affecting the property of orphans were managed. The arrangement rather concerned orphans with property, than the poor, but still it shows that the municipality recognised a responsibility with regard to a helpless class of the community. The municipal authorities at Southampton, however, undertook much more extensive measures for preventing want, and it is interesting to notice that this action was very probably undertaken in consequence of the customs of the ruling guild. In ordinances at least as early as the fourteenth century forfeits and alms were awarded to the poor, and members were to be assisted when in poverty. In the fifteenth century "the townys almys were settled on a plan," and lists were kept of the weekly payments. The Steward's book of 1441 states that the town gave weekly to the poor £4. 2s. 1d. which, according to the value of money at the time, might have furnished relief for about one hundred and fifty people . Thus, before the sixteenth century, state and town had begun to make regulations for the relief of the poor. Some of these regulations were dictated by a desire to repress vagrants. They were closely connected with the enforcement of the labour legislation of the time, and were embodied in the same statutes, and administered by the same officials. But other provisions were due to the fact that there was a growing tendency for the state to interfere to prevent the maladministration of ecclesiastical revenues, and for non-ecclesiastical bodies to undertake the administration of charity. Still, before the sixteenth century, most of these measures were negative rather than positive. The orders concerning the repression of sturdy beggars were more prominent than those concerning the relief of the poor. The latter were as yet infrequent and had little practical effect. The main part of the charity of the time was still administered by ecclesiastics and was obtained from endowed charities and from voluntary gifts. But, in the sixteenth century, the older methods of relief failed to cope with the new social difficulties, and the older feeling in favour of the ecclesiastical control of charity was considerably lessened. At the same time, the tendencies that already led to the management of relief by public secular authorities were accentuated. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, therefore, the organisation of poor relief was more and more undertaken by municipality and state, and the English system of poor relief was created and first administered. [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] 1. Increase of vagrants. (1) Harman's description of the bands of vagrants in England. (2) Vagrants on the Continent. 2. Causes for the CHAPTER II. THE CAUSES OF THE REORGANISATION OF POOR RELIEF. 1. Increase of vagrants. (1) Harman's description of vagrants in England. (2) Bands of vagrants on the Continent. 2. Reasons why men became beggars. (1) The destruction of the feudal system destroyed employments furnished by war and service. (2) Manufactures on a large scale less stable than old occupations. (3) Rise of prices affected food earlier than wages. (4) In England enclosures were made because sheep were more profitable than corn. 3. Old methods of charity. (1) Private individuals. (2) Monasteries. (3) Hospitals. 4. Attempts at reorganisation on the Continent. 5. Three factors in making of English poor relief: (1) the orders of the towns; (2) the regulations of the statutes; (3) the efforts of the Privy Council to secure the administration of adequate relief. Three periods in the history of the first making of the English system: (1) 1514-1569; (2) 1569-1597; (3) 1597-1644. The earlier years of the sixteenth century began a period of great changes in the position of the poorer classes, and these changes soon resulted in a series of attempts to reform and reorganise the whole system of poor relief. The desire to repress vagrants had already led state and town to make regulations concerning the relief of the poor, but whereas, before the sixteenth century, beggars were only an occasional nuisance, they now became a chronic plague. The great increase in the numbers of these vagabonds appears to have begun early in the reign of Henry VIII. Thomas Harman, a gentleman of Kent, in about 1566, wrote an elaborate description of twenty-three varieties whom he had found to be in existence . One of his anecdotes shows that they were already numerous soon after the execution of the Duke of Buckingham in 1521 . A man of some importance, he states, died about this time, and crowds of beggars attended the funeral. Some of them were poor householders and these returned to their homes at night. But the others were sheltered in a large barn which, on being searched, was found to contain seven-score men and at least as many women. The bands of these wanderers continued to increase, for Harrison, in his Description of England, tells us, "it is not yet full threescore yeares since this trade began: but how it has prospered since that time it is easie to judge, for they are now supposed, of one sex and another, to amount to above 10,000 persons ." Harman's description of this "rowsey ragged rabblement of rakehelles" shows that some sort of organisation existed amongst them. He prints a slang dictionary of thieves' language, and states that this had been in existence for thirty years: he also gives an account of their order of precedence, thus showing that many degrees of roguery were recognised by the rogues themselves. We can see from his account of their pranks, that they were both cunning and daring, and were often a great hardship to the honest citizens of the poorer classes. Not only did they break into houses by night and pilfer the pigs and the poultry, but they were daring enough to pass a hook through the windows and draw the clothes off sleeping men; to rob men on the highway who were travelling home from fairs, and to come by night to lonely houses and force the owners to deliver up what money they had on the premises. Harman's tale on this point may illustrate the dangers of the situation. One night two rogues went to an inn, and sat down and drank merrily, offering the pot to those of the company they fancied. Amongst others, a priest was there, and when he had gone they began to make inquiries of the hostess concerning him, saying they were nephews of a priest in this neighbourhood and had not seen him since they were six years old. She, suspecting no harm, gave them all the information they wanted; told them the parson kept little company and had but one woman and a boy in the house. The thieves departed with the intention of robbing so defenceless a prey, but they found that his house was built of stone and his windows and doors well fastened. They thought force would avail little, and therefore tried fraud. One of the rogues, with piteous moans, asked for relief, and the parson, being moved by his distress, put his arm out of window to give him twopence. The rascal seized, not the twopence, but the priest's hand, and his companion secured his wrist also, so that their victim could not liberate himself at all. The rogues demanded three pounds and succeeded in obtaining four marks which was all the poor man had in the house. They bound him, therefore, also to drink twelve pence next day at the inn and to thank the good wife for the cheer they had had. The unfortunate parson could only use "contentacion for his remedy," but he kept his promise, and the hostess persuaded him to say no more of it "lest when they shal understand of it in the parish they wyll but laugh you to skorne ." This plague of vagrants was not, however, peculiar to England, but arose about the same time in all the countries of Western Europe. A book that somewhat resembled Harman's appeared in Germany as early as 1514 ; this contained both an account of the different orders of vagabonds and also a "Canting Dictionary." Martin Luther often discussed the subject of beggars, and in 1528, wrote a preface to this very book . In Germany, therefore, the increase in the number of beggars seems to be even earlier than in England. In Scotland and the towns of the Netherlands the statutes and town ordinances show us that the same trouble assailed them about the same time, and France in 1516 was already troubled by large numbers of discharged or wandering soldiers . As these bands of vagrants were found in so many countries at once, the principal causes for their [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33]