The New Poor Law and the Struggle for Union Chargeability
MA URICE CA PLAN THE NEW POOR LAW AND THE STRUGGLE FOR UNION CHARGEABILITY Thrasymachus: "Listen then. I define justice or right as what is in the interest of the stronger party." Plato, The Republic, I, St. 338 While much has been heard in recent times of the evils attaching to "the principles of 1834", other important aspects of the New Poor Law have been seriously neglected. The laws of settlement and removal were unjust and inhumane, and the system of parochial rating was anomalous, uneven and, indeed, thoroughly iniquitous. One of the main features of the Poor Law Amendment Act had been the grouping of the parishes of England and Wales into unions of parishes. Those of a medium-sized town usually constituted one union, while in the countryside the typical union tended to comprise all the parishes within a radius of up to about ten miles of a country town, its centre. Under the Act, the administration of the Poor Law was based on the union and not, as heretofore, on the parish; yet the latter remained the financial unit, each parish being chargeable for its own Poor Law expenditure. This uneven arrangement prevented the effective oper- ation of the Act, and, as will be shown, had unhappy consequences. Attempts at reform in these matters were strenuously opposed in Parlia- ment between 1845 and 1865, and only in the latter year was the Union Chargeability Act passed. The purpose of the present article is to show that the main opposition to reform came from a section of the landed interest whose object was to maintain the status quo with regard to settlement law and to keep alive the pernicious distinction between open and close parishes.
[Show full text]