Source 2 gives further suggestions that the implementation was indeed cruel. The source comes from Oliver Twist written by Charles Dickens at the time the poor law was implemented. The source gives examples of less eligibility where after a briefing Oliver goes ‘on a rough hard bed,’ where he ‘sobbed himself to sleep.’ However being fictional it is difficult to use this information solely to suggest the poor law was cruel. The source also states how workers were ‘being starved by a gradual process in the house.’ If true this shows genuine cruelty. This can be further seen in the diet shown in source 4. This shows a highly monotonous diet which is small in quantity. Further evidence to show that the workhouse diet was cruel; I have taken from the ‘Victorian Crickowell’ website where a source states ‘The regular weekly diet for the workhouse in 1838 was almost the same as for prisoners in Brecon jail!’ Also the same site states from a bread delivery contract "The quality to be best seconds, to be delivered at Llangattock Poor House, Crickhowell Poor House, Llanelly and Tretower. The bread to be not less than 24 nor more than 48 hours old." This shows unnecessary cruelty as I would be possible for the bread to be eaten fresh. However contradicting this source 3 states ‘Although the workhouse food be more ample in quantity and better quality than that of which the labourer’s family partakes.’ The evidence stated goes as far as to suggest the workhouse was poor and small in quantity, but not necessarily cruel as it was enough to survive.
Source 2 also talks of oakum picking. Oakum picking was a common task in workhouses where workers would pick rope fibres from old tarred rope. This would lead to ‘nails broken and fingers bleeding,’ as stated on victorianengland.org. Nowadays this work could be seen as extremely brutal and cruel. However compared to some of the work and injuries obtained by the hard manual work that labourers did outside the workhouse, this type of work could be seen as mild in brutality. Maybe as source 6 suggest ‘workhouses were depressing and life inside of them was monotonous.’ As constantly doing oakum picking would most certainly be, and because of this depressing and monotonous life, goes to suggest that life inside of the workhouse was cruel.
Source 5 supports the statement showing the segregation in the workhouse, in a vivid manner. The cartoon shows a stooped evil looking figure snatching a child away from its Mother. The Mother looks extremely distressed clutching onto her child. This suggests much cruelty on both the Mother and Child’s part. This was something that would not happen outside of a workhouse. There is also evidence to supports this source taken from Rees which states babies were separated from their Mother’s once they stopped breast feeding. Source 2 also states evidence of segregation cruelty stating ‘instead of compelling a man to support his family, as they had theretofore done, took his family away from him, and made him a bachelor!’ Although this is fictional evidence from Oliver Twist, there is much evidence showing segregation took place. An example can be taken from the website where on the Andover section the workhouse plan shows separate sleeping quarters and working areas. This can be seen as cruel as it was not necessary to split families apart. This evidence goes much in favour stating the implementation of the poor law was indeed cruel.
In conclusion there is a variety of evidence that suggests the implementation of the poor law was cruel. From sources 2 and 4 it is evident that a degree of cruelty was inflicted with the diet of the workhouse with its monotonous and minimalist make up. However as source 3 states ‘more ample in quantity and better in quality than that of which the labourer’s family partakes,’ suggests the diet was not intended to be cruel but not to be desirable as the workhouse was intended. Cruelty is also evident in the sources 2 and 4 where segregation is shown. It was not necessary for the workhouse to enforce segregation in order to function properly, so therefore could be seen as cruel as it is separating families. However this again I feel was to make the workhouse seem a less desirable place to work as intended, as if it were desirable more of the able bodied poor would opt to work in the workhouse than find their own work. This is also the case I feel in the type of work conducted such as oakum picking. There is evidence of unnecessary cruelty such as that which happened in the Andover workhouse and as highlighted in source 1. However these ‘scandals’ are few and far between and are more to do with cruelty committed by individuals, than that created by the poor law as a whole. So this can not be generalised. On the whole I feel the implementation of the cruel law was not intentionally cruel, however was enforced in such a way to encourage the able bodied poor to look for work themselves.
Word Count: 1129
