However despite such measures being introduced, the law was struggling to cope with costs. More people were beginning to rely on the relief as a result of many factors, such as the rise of the population, commercialisation of farming and bad harvests. The 1792-1815 war with France further shortened food supplies and due to inflation prices were higher than ever before. The attitude towards poor people had relaxed, no longer being seen as a result of immoral lifestyle, and the system was beginning to be abused by outdoor relief poor deliberately having large families in order to gain more allowance (Martin, 2000, p.55). The Royal Commission made its report in 1834, noting that the cost of Poor Relief was rising rapidly and local administration in many parishes were inefficient and often corrupt. In response to the number of recommendations the report made, the new Poor Law was set up later that year (Martin, 2000, p.58).
This new law had been passed with significant ease due to a number of reasons. The Government set up a Royal Commission of Enquiry, with twenty-six Assistant Commissioners paid to visit over three thousand parishes in search of this evidence to expose the ‘evils’ of the existing system, therefore supporting the need for a reform. However, it is suggested that this evidence was sought out and used selectively by the Commissioners, who knew what they were expected to find, purely to back up the Whigs’ already predetermined plans. The evidence gathered was in fact wildly inaccurate, with only ten percent of the questionnaires sent out receiving a response (http://www.victorianweb.org). It emerged that Nassau Senior, a political economist who took a special interest in the work of the Commission, had written the main parts of the report before all the evidence had even been submitted. It was obvious to see that the results of this report were clearly biased to work in favour of the reform.
As well as this major government willingness, there was a general climate for change. With the Tories in minority they were overwhelmed by Whig arguments, whom were generally more receptive to ideas for change. They had helped create this atmosphere and desire for change by publishing articles on social problems, such as in the Edinburgh Review through the 1820s. Objectors such as William Cobbett were not listened to and it was hard to argue against such factual evidence as of that on the report, despite it being not entirely accurate. Finally, this new law did exactly as the Lords and Members of Parliament intended – to reduce the cost on their own pockets by providing relief for the poor cheaply and efficiently.
In conclusion, there were many factors which contributed to a reformation of the old Poor Law being made a necessity. The Commission was the most influential factor in the effortless passing of the new law, and although this evidence to back it up may have been biased, other factors equally played a part in helping the bill come to pass. Ultimately, the government achieved what they set out to do and put a stop to the rising costs of the inefficient Poor Law of 1601.
Reference List
-
Martin, D (2000), Britain 1815-1851: A Study In Depth, London: Hodder Education
-
Bloy, M (2002), The 1832 Royal Commission of Inquiry into the operation of the Poor Laws, Available online at: http://www.victorianweb.org/history/poorlaw/royalcom.html [Accessed 1st December 2012]
Bibliography
-
Collier M, Pedley P (2001), Britain 1815-51: Protest and Reform, Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers
-
Rees, R (2001), Poverty and Public Health 1815-1948, Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers
-
Jenkins J, Evans E (2002), Victorian Social Life: British Social History 1815-1914, London: John Murray Ltd
-
Lynch, M (1999), An Introduction to Nineteenth-Century British History 1800-1914, London: Hodder Education
-
Murphy D, Staton R, Walsh-Atkins P, Whiskerd N (1998), Britain 1815-1918, London: HarperCollins Publishers Ltd
-
Paterson, M (2008), Life in Victorian Britain: A Social History of Queen Victoria’s Reign, London: Constable & Robinson Ltd