Economic prisoners: dithering jailers

Introduction

Victorian Bournemouth (180) observes how Guardians of the Union workhouse reacted to challenges occurring during the 1880s. Their handling of outdoor and indoor poverty relief had to contend with both external and internal problems. Economic conditions worsened. Internal dissent divided the managers. The Guardians’ minute books remain offline, but local press provided coverage, although this declined over time. Distillation of its reports suggests that the Union and its Board of Guardians faced three challenges.

Victorian Bournemouth (180): managing the system

Relief

People occupying the middle and upper levels of society had a deep fear of poverty which dated back to social changes in the sixteenth century, if not before. Their position reflected productive activity and effort. This provided economic security from which blossomed social rank. They resented those who wanted gains without effort, in particular those who could work but chose not to: sturdy beggars. That such people might cooperate to damage property and destroy a society from which they felt excluded instilled fear. Workhouses, in effect paupers’ prisons, provided the safest measure. They kept beggars, sturdy or otherwise, under direct control, away from society. Yet, the Christchurch Union, even with its recent, larger workhouse, could not keep all its paupers behind locked doors. About twice as many again resided within the Union, supported by outdoor relief. This seems to have cost about a shilling per head each week.

Stress

In the 1880s, widening local poverty seemed to increase pressure on the Guardians. As much as they strove not to encourage people to take relief, economic factors may have forced their hand. Most press reports during the decade listed the amounts paid on outdoor relief, the number of paupers assisted therewith, and the number of the workhouse’s inmates. On occasion, the numbers fluctuated, but overall, the trend seemed to increase: more paupers, more expenditure. Bournemouth’s economy seemed healthy: ever-present construction work, expanding retail sector. Not every resident prospered, however. The system of settlement discouraged paupers from migrating elsewhere. They became economic prisoners. At the beginning of the decade, around three hundred took outdoor relief, but this increased on occasion by half again. The inmate population, below a hundred in early days, soon also expanded by half. Steady requests for salary increases from staff suggests that inflation lurked in the economy.

Victorian Bournemouth (180): managing the upstart

Cuckoo

The workhouse’s location, the Union’s name, both placed Christchurch at the centre of poverty control in the area. Reorganisation of the country’s system occurred when Bournemouth’s commercial development flickered into life. Few perhaps would have anticipated that a row of villas built at the end of the 1830s would have grown into an ambitious township larger and more aggressive than Christchurch. Contributions levied for the Union in 1876 charged Christchurch £1,200, Sopley £150, and Holdenhurst (i.e. Bournemouth) £1,300. Twelve years later, Sopley had decreased, Christchurch risen to £1,700 but Bournemouth had doubled (£2,400). Increases in contribution drove constant pressure from Bournemouth people to obtain representation on the Board of Guardians. Earlier analyses have found considerable dissent between the Guardians based in Christchurch and those travelling from Bournemouth. This reflected a larger tussle between the townships. Thus, the Board had to contain internal pressures separate to managing local poverty.

Change

By the 1880s, a form of peace appeared within the Board. Although, the chairman belonged to the Christchurch ‘group’, the Bournemouth people gained stable influence through filling the vice-chairmanship. The Reverend J. R. Pretyman occupied this for most of the decade. The Union’s development represented an organism growing by cell-division. In 1883, nine doctors based in Bournemouth withdrew their previous free treatment to paupers. The police also refused to allow Bournemouth constables to act as virtual relieving officers. After initial reluctance, the Board spread medical and relief across two divisions representing the towns. Later, a third medical division emerged. Towards the decade’s end, the Board agreed to hold meetings starting at 1415 to allow the Bournemouth Guardians time to arrive on the train. At the same time, supervision of education for pauper children within the Bournemouth area left the Union’s control and formed part of the new Corporation’s educational structure.

Victorian Bournemouth (180): managing poverty

Paradox

JR Pretyman, a published author on poverty, thought he knew why the Government would never succeed in locking up all paupers in the workhouse, whatever their capacity. Society accepted poverty as part of its natural state. The issue consisted of face. If family members fell into poverty, while lamentable, this happened in the way of things. If contained within the family, no trouble arose. Outdoor relief addressed the issue, but with little public attention. If kin paupers entered the workhouse, as law required, then all and sundry would know that poverty (and shame) had touched your family. ‘Some persons did not object to their relatives becoming paupers so long as they did not appear to be paupers. They did not like them going into the house for instance.’ Pretyman knew about the imperative for workhouses, but he also understood the human implications that prevented them from becoming the complete solution.

Drink

The Guardians felt pressure from the Local Government Board. ‘ … it would not be satisfactory to HM Inspector, Mr Baldwin Fleming, when he came down, as an increase in out-relief, in proportion to indoor-relief, was considered by him to be a sign of faulty administration of the Poor Law’. Furthermore, they suspected, if they did not know, that some outdoor relief money paid for drink. Pretyman tried to limit outdoor relief to cases of sickness, infirmity, or emergency, because he knew about money for drink. The others would not take this step, even though workhouse inmates played the system. Some army and navy pensioners resided in the workhouse until their money arrived. On its receipt, they ceased living as workhouse inmates, going outside to drink their pension. After that, they returned, until the same time next month. Human attitudes and behaviour made applying the law hard for the Guardians. 

Takeaway

Victorian Bournemouth (180) has explored three pressures under which the Board of Guardians had to administer pauper relief in the Christchurch Union. Economic pressures, including perhaps inflation, increased the numbers seeking relief. Bournemouth’s rapid growth changed the balance of power within the Board and changed the Union’s organisational structure. Human attitudes and behaviour made it difficult for the Guardians to apply the Poor Law to the levels required by the Government.

References

For references and engagement, please get in touch. Main primary sources: here and here (subscriptions needed). See also here and here. Thanks to Phillip V. Allingham for the picture.