This certainly fights against the view that Alexander II was reluctant in his reforms on the surface – however, once investigated, the limits of emancipation are clear. The 49 year redemption payments were a huge limiting factor in allowing peasants economic freedom to then have social freedom, and class was still a major issue even if it had been reduced. The highly inflated land prices that ensued meant that very few peasants could afford land, and Alexander II did nothing to resolve this. It does lend to the idea of his ‘radical’ reforms being fairly reluctant as he did not go further with them. Alexander III took an even more conservative view during his reign, repealing many of Alexander II’s social
The Old Poor Law of 1834 was reformed because it could not cope due to the large numbers of people claiming poor relief. This was due to population rise, commercialisation of farming which left people with no jobs, decline of agricultural crafts, harvest failures, food shortages due to war, higher food prices and change in attitude to claiming social welfare as there was no stigma attached to being poor anymore. This led to different measures such as the introduction of the Speenhamland system of 1795. Having investigated the reasons for the reformation of the Poor Law, we will now focus on the reasons that led to the reform. There were six main reasons that led to the old Poor Law Reform to easily pass which were: a willing government, Tories were a minority, Climate change, objectors were not listened to, and a Report based on evidence collected by the commission of enquiry.
They send out thousands upon thousands of handbills requesting workers. In reality they are just trying to further their own wealth by paying workers lower and lower wages. If there are too many workers, they can pay as little as they want to. A man will not let his family go hungry when he can change it. He will gladly work for two cents per bucket of peaches.
The Imperial secretary Sang Hongyang declares “abolition of these measures is not expedient.” This statement means that Legalists believe the policies are necessary to keep the empire running and that it is not practical to abolish them, for then the treasuries would be depleted and funding for defense for the soldiers would be obsolete. Then he goes on to explain how “equitable marketing” was established and how it contributes to their country. Before this system, the people would send respective products as tributes to support the country, but the Legalists think that people are untrustworthy and should be governed by laws to force them to do good. They came up with this set of laws, i.e. setting up transportation offices, forcing the people to send their goods to these places because the government did not trust the quality of the products sent from the people.
When left to their own devices, and given shelter from the corrupt social system that keeps them down, the migrants make the first steps toward establishing an almost utopian mini-society. Moreover, life in Weed patch disproves the landowners’ beliefs that “Okies” lead undignified, uncivilized lives. Indeed, the migrants show themselves to be more civilized than the landowners, as demonstrated by the way in which they respond to the Farmers’ Association’s plot to sabotage the camp. Most of the wealthy landowners believe that poverty-stricken, uneducated farmers deserve to be treated contemptuously. These men maintain that to reward farmers with amenities such as toilets, showers, and comfortable wages will merely give them a sense of entitlement, embolden them to ask for more, and thus create social and economic unrest.
Though EPAs have their advantages, the community needs more education about the responsibilities that entail being selected so that the risk factors for misuse of this power be reduced. Moreover, the economy, as it is now, does not help to lessen the potential for abuse. In some instances, depending upon the gravity of the economic situation of the selected administrator, he or she may go as far as selling the older person’s assets and properties including the primary
In some parishes this was collected by the churches in others they had specific collectors. The rich and middle classes felt that they were subsidising the poor to be lazy and not take responsibility for themselves and that the poor were just avoiding work and not supporting their own families. They also felt that if the hand outs continued they would never use their own initiative to fund and support themselves and that the existing system encouraged people to have more children than they could afford because they knew their life would be subsidised, so because of this, in 1832 Earl Grey the prime minister set up a poor law commission to examine the existing system and make reforms. The commission led by Nassau Senior and Edwin Chadwick wanted an end to outdoor relief for the poor and were positive that the workhouses would be a success (Bagley,1966 pg 48) The Royal Commissions findings were published and the recommendations become the basis of the poor law amendment act (Checkland 1974). Summary of the 1834 Poor Law amendment act.
The implementation of the Poor Law Amendment Act was significant in reducing the countries costs, but not as successful at changing attitudes towards the poor in the short term. The Act was preceded by the well-publicised Royal Commission of Enquiry into the operation of the Poor Laws in 1832. Prior to the Royal Commission, there had only been cosmetic changes to the poverty relief system, since the establishment of the Elizabethan Poor Law in 1601. The Elizabethan Poor Law favoured assistance and correction as forms of repression and took a laissez-faire approach towards the poor.
Compassionate reasons where one of the underlying reasons many historians argue upon the realise of the report on poverty from booth and rowntree in their study of the English town York , a town not normally associated with extreme poverty they found 29% of the population were well below the poverty line. Another reason was the very real fear workers were discouraged by the poor conditions and governments and may later turn against the government and form mass strikes or in serious cases rebellion or join the communist groups within Britain. Political self interest was high on the liberal’s agenda many historians argue. The franchise was being extended to the average man slowly and the liberals realised the average man did not benefit much from the government’s approach to peoples life’s and with the rise of the labour party and other parties many historians argue that it was out of desire to be re-elected that the liberals slowly brought about this change in reform. They didn’t get a majority government in 1910 like they did in 1906 which led them to think that social reform was the way to gain votes.
Member of the lowest caste would not have been able to pay a fine or secure a guarantor so they would lose their civil rights, be prohibited from practising a profession or being employed in any position of trust. Also they may be excluded from the participation in religious rites. Isolation within the community would be great and would act as a deterrent as the threat of exclusion was a major factor in upholding the law. As in Celtic Britain we still issue fines as a form of punishment, if fines are not paid the court can issue an order to seize the value of goods of the fine. We have community service rather than redemption by working on the land.