第17章

orcouldgivesecurityforthedischargeoftheparishtothemagistrates’

satisfaction，hewasexemptfromthisprovision。

AsthisActcarriedwithittheconsequencethatfortydays’residence

withoutcomplaintfromtheparishofficersgainedthenew-comerasettlement，

itwasaninevitabletemptationtoParishAtosmuggleitspoorintoParish

B，wherefortydays’residencewithouttheknowledgeoftheparishofficers

wouldgainthemasettlement。Fiercequarrelsbrokeoutbetweentheparishes

inconsequence。Tocomposetheseitwasenacted(1JamesII。c。17)that

thefortydays’residenceweretobereckonedonlyafterawrittennotice

hadbeengiventoaparishofficer。EventhiswasnotenoughtoprotectParish

B，andby3WilliamandMary，c。11(1691)itwasprovidedthatthisnotice

mustbereadinchurch，immediatelyafterdivineservice，andthenregistered

inthebookkeptforpoor’saccounts。Suchaconditionmadeitpractically

impossibleforanypoormantogainasettlementbyfortydays’residence，

unlesshistenementwereofthevalueof£；10ayear，buttheActallowed

animmigranttoobtainasettlementinanyoneoffourways；(1)bypaying

theparishtaxes；(2)byexecutingapublicannualofficeintheparish；

(3)byservinganapprenticeshipintheparish；(4)bybeinghiredfora

year’sserviceintheparish。(This，however，onlyappliedtotheunmarried。)

In1697(8and9WilliamIII。e。30)afurtherimportantmodificationof

thesettlementlawswasmade。Topreventthearbitraryejectionofnew-comers

byparishofficers，whofearedthatthefresharrivalorhischildrenmight

somehoworothergainasettlement，itwasenactedthatifthenew-comer

broughtwithhimtoParishBacertificatefromtheparishofficersofParish

Atakingresponsibilityforhim，thenhecouldnotberemovedtillbebecame

actuallychargeable。ItwasfurtherdecidedbythisandsubsequentActsand

bylegaldecisions，thatthegrantingofacertificatewastobeleftto

thediscretionoftheparishofficersandmagistrates，thatthecostofremoval

fellonthecertificatingparish，andthatacertificateholdercouldonly

gainasettlementinanewparishbyrentingatenementof£；10annual

value，orbyexecutingaparishoffice，andthathisapprenticeorhired

servantcouldnotgainasettlement。

Inadditiontothesemethodsofgainingasettlementtherewerefourother

ways，’throughwhich，’accordingtoEden，’itisprobablethatbyfarthe

greaterpartofthelabouringPoor……areactuallysettled。’(18*)(1)Bastards，

withsomeexceptions，acquiredasettlementbybirth；(19*)(2)legitimate

childrenalsoacquiredasettlementbybirthiftheirfather’s，orfailing

that，theirmother’slegalsettlementwasnotknown；(3)womengainedasettlement

bymarriage；(4)personswithanestateoftheirownwereirremovable，if

residingonit，howeversmallitmightbe。

VeryfewimportantmodificationshadbeenmadeinthelawsofSettlement

duringthecenturyafter1697。In1722(9GeorgeI。c。7)itwasprovided

thatnopersonwastoobtainasettlementinanyparishbythepurchaseof

anyestateorinterestoflessvaluethan£；30，tobe’bonafidepaid，’

aprovisionwhichsuggeststhatparisheshadconnivedatgiftsofmoneyfor

thepurchaseofestatesinordertodiscardtheirpaupers：bythesameAct

thepaymentofthescavengerorhighwayratewasdeclarednottoconfera

settlement。In1784(24GeorgeIII。c。6)soldiers，sailorsandtheirfamilies

wereallowedtoexercisetradeswheretheyliked，andwerenottoberemovable

tilltheybecameactuallychargeable；andin1793(33GeorgeIII。c。54)

thislatterconcessionwasextendedtomembersofFriendlySocieties。None

oftheseconcessionsaffectedthenormallabourer，anddownto1795alabourer

couldonlymakehiswaytoanewvillageifhisownvillagewouldgivehim

acertificate，oriftheothervillageinvitedhim。Hislibertywasentirely

controlledbytheparishofficers。

HowfardidtheSettlementActsoperate？Howfardidthisbodyoflaw

reallyaffectthecomfortandlibertyofthepoor？Thefiercestcriticism

comesfromAdamSmith，whosefundamentalinstinctsrebelledagainstsocrude

andbrutalaninterferencewithhumanfreedom。’Toremoveamanwhohascommitted

nomisdemeanour，fromaparishwherehechusestoreside，isanevidentviolation

ofnaturallibertyandjustice。ThecommonpeopleofEngland，however，so

jealousoftheirliberty，but，likethecommonpeopleofmostothercountries，

neverrightlyunderstandingwhereinitconsists，havenow，formorethan

acenturytogether，sufferedthemselvestobeexposedtothisoppression

withoutaremedy。Thoughmenofreflexion，too，havesometimescomplained

ofthelawofsettlementsasapublicgrievance；yetithasneverbeenthe

objectofanygeneralpopularclamour，suchasthatagainstgeneralwarrants，

anabusivepracticeundoubtedly，butsuchaoneaswasnotlikelytooccasion

anygeneraloppression。ThereisscarceapoormaninEngland，offortyyears

ofage，Iwillventuretosay，whohasnot，insomepartofhislife，felt

himselfmostcruellyoppressedbythisill-contrivedlawofsettlements。’(20*)

AdamSmith’sviewissupportedbytwocontemporarywritersonthePoor

Law，Dr。BurnandMr。Hay。Dr。Burn，whopublishedahistoryofthePoor

Lawin1764，givesthispictureoftheoverseer：’TheofficeofanOverseer

ofthePoorseemstobeunderstoodtobethis，tokeepanextraordinarylook-out

topreventpersonscomingtoinhabitwithoutcertificates，andtoflyto

theJusticestoremovethem：andifamanbringsacertificate，thentocaution

theinhabitantsnottolethimafarmof£；10ayear，andtotakecare

tokeephimoutofallparishoffices。’(21*)Hefurthersaysthattheparish

officerswillassistapoormanintakingafarminaneighboringparish，

andgivehim£；10fortherent。Mr。Hay，M。P。，protestedinhisremarks

onthePoorLawsagainstthehardshipsinflictedonthepoorbytheLaws

ofSettlement。’Itleavesitinthebreastoftheparishofficerswhether

theywillgrantapoorpersonacertificateorno。’(22*)Eden，ontheother

hand，thoughtAdamSmith’spictureoverdrawn，andhecontendedthatthough

therewerenodoubtcasesofvexatiousremoval，theLawsofSettlementwere

notadministeredinthiswayeverywhere。Howlettalsoconsideredtheoperation

oftheLawsofSettlementtobe’trifling，’andinstancedthegrowthofSheffield，

Birmingham，andManchesterasproofthattherewaslittleinterferencewith

themobilityoflabour。

Acarefulstudyoftheevidenceseemstoleadtotheconclusionthatthe

LawsofSettlementwereinpractice，astheywereonpaper，aviolationof

naturalliberty；thattheydidnotstoptheflowoflabour，butthatthey

relateditintheinterestoftheemployingclass。TheanswertoHowlett

isgivenbyRugglesintheAnnalsofAgriculture。(23*)Hebeginsby

sayingthattheLawofSettlementhasmadeapoorfamily’ofnecessitystationary；

andobligedthemtorestsatisfiedwiththosewagestheycanobtainwhere

theirlegalsettlementhappenstobe；arestraintonthemwhichoughtto

insuretothemwagesintheparishwheretheymustremain，moreadequate

totheirnecessities，becauseitprecludestheminamannerfrombringing

theirlabour，theonlymarketableproducetheypossess，tothebestmarket；

itisthisrestraintwhichhas，inallmanufacturingtowns，beenonecause

ofreducingthepoortosuchastateofmiserablepoverty；for，amongthe

manufacturers，theyhavetoofrequentlyfoundmasterswhohavetaken，and

continuetotakeeveryadvantage，whichstrictlawwillgive；ofconsequence，

thepricesoflabourhavebeen，inmanufacturingtowns，inaninverseratio

ofthenumberofpoorsettledintheplace；andthesamecausehasincreased

thatnumber，byinvitingforeigners，intimeswhenlargeordersrequired

manyworkmen；themastersthemselvesbeingtheoverseers，whosedutyasparish

officershasbeenopposedbytheirinterestinsupplyingthedemand。’In

otherwords，whenitsuitedanemployertoletfreshworkersin，hewould，

quaoverseer，encouragethemtocomewithorwithoutcertificates；butwhen

theywereonceinand’settled’hewouldrefusethemcertificatestoenable

themtogoandtrytheirfortuneselsewhere，inparisheswhereacertificate

wasdemandedwitheachpoornew-comer。(24*)Thusitisnotsurprisingto

find，fromEden’sReports，thatcertificatesarenevergrantedat

LeedsandSkipton；seldomgrantedatSheffield；notwillinglygrantedat

Nottingham，andthatatHalifaxcertificatesarenotgrantedatpresent，

andonlythreehavebeengrantedinthelasteighteenyears。

Ithasbeenarguedthatthefiguresaboutremovalsindifferentparishes

givenbyEdeninhissecondandthirdvolumesshowthattheLawofSettlement

was’notsoblackasithasbeenpainted。’(25*)Butinconsideringthesmall

numberofremovals，wemustalsoconsiderthelargenumberofplaceswhere

thereisthisentry，’certificatesarenevergranted。’Itneededconsiderable

couragetogotoanewparishwithoutacertificateandruntheriskofan

ignominiousexpulsion，andthoughalloverseerswerenotsostrictasthe

onedescribedbyDr。Burn，yetthefameofonevexatiousremovalwouldhave

afar-reachingeffectincheckingmigration。Itisclearthatthelawmust

haveoperatedinthiswayindistrictswhereenclosurestookawayemployment

withintheparish。SupposeHodgetohavelivedatKibworth-BeauchampinLeicestershire。

About1780，3600acreswereenclosedandturnedfromarabletopasture；before

enclosurethefields’weresolelyappliedtotheproductionofcorn，’and

’thePoorhadthenplentyofemploymentinweeding，reaping，threshing，etc。，

andcouldalsocollectagreatdealofcornbygleaning。’(26*)Afterthe

change，asEdenadmits，athirdorperhapsafourthofthenumberofhands

wouldbesufficienttodoallthefarmingworkrequired。Letussaythat

Hodgewasoneofthesuperfluoustwo-thirds，andthattheparishauthorities

refusedhimacertificate。Whatdidhedo？Heappliedtotheoverseer，who

senthimoutasaroundsman。(27*)Hewouldprefertobeartheillsheknew

ratherthanfacetheunknownintheshapeofanewparishofficer，whomight

demandacertificate，andsendhimbackwithignominyifhefailedtoproduce

one。Ifhetookhiswifeandfamilywithhimtherewasevenlesschanceof

thedemandforacertificatebeingwaived。(28*)SoatKibworth-Beauchamp

Hodgeandhiscompanionsremained，inastateofchronicdiscontent。’The

Poorcomplainofhardtreatmentfromtheoverseers，andtheoverseersaccuse

thePoorofbeingsaucy。’(29*)

Now，atfirstsight，itseemsobviousthatitwouldbetotheinterest

ofaparishtogiveapoormanacertificate，iftherewerenomarketfor

hislabourathome，inordertoenablehimtogoelsewhereandmakeanindependent

living。Thisseemsthereasonableview，butitisincorrect。Inthesame

way，itwouldseemobviousthataparishwouldgiveslightrelieftoaperson

whoseclaimwasindoubtratherthanspendtentimestheamountincontesting

thatclaimatlaw。Inpointoffact，inneithercasedowefindwhatseems

thereasonablecourseadopted。Parishesspentfortunesinlawsuits。Andto

theparishauthoritiesitwouldseemthattheyriskedmoreingivingHodge

acertificatethaninobliginghimtostayathome，evenifhecouldnot

makealivinginhisnativeplace；forhemight，withhiscertificate，wander

alongwayoff，andthenfallintodifficulties，andhavetobefetchedback

atgreatexpense，andthecostofremovinghimwouldfallonthecertificating

parish。ThereisasignificantpassageintheAnnalsofAgriculture(30*)

aboutthewooltradein1788。’Wehavelatelyhadsomehand-billsscattered

aboutBocking，Iamtold，promisingfullemploytocombersandweavers，that

wouldmigratetoNottingham。Eveniftheychosetotrythisoffer；asprobably

aparishcertificateforsuchadistancewouldberefused；itcannotbeattempted。’

Whereparishessawanimmediateprospectofgettingridoftheirsuperfluous

poorintoaneighboringparishwithopenfieldsoracommon，theywereindeed

notcharyofgrantingcertificates。AtHothfieldinKent，forexample，’full

halfofthelabouringpoorarecertificatedpersonsfromotherparishes：

theabove-mentionedcommon，whichaffordsthemthemeansofkeepingacow，

orpoultry，issupposedtodrawmanyPoorintotheparish；certificatedpersons

areallowedtodigpeat。’(31*)

IntheRulesforthegovernmentofthePoorinthehundredsofLoesand

WilfordinSuffolk(32*)veryexplicitdirectionsaregivenaboutthegranting

ofcertificates。Inthefirstplace，beforeanycertificateisgrantedthe

applicantmustproduceanexaminationtakenbeforeaJusticeofthePeace，

showingthathebelongstooneoftheparisheswithinthehundred。Granted

thathehascompliedwiththiscondition，then，(1)ifhebealaboureror

husbandmannocertificatewillbegrantedhimoutofthehundredsunless

hebelongstotheparishofKenton，andeveninthatcaseitis’nottoexceed

thedistanceofthreemiles；’(2)ifhebeatradesman，artificer，ormanufacturer

acertificatemaybegrantedtohimoutofthehundreds，butinnocaseis

ittoexceedthedistanceoftwentymilesfromtheparishtowhichhebelongs。

Theextentofthehundredswasroughlyfourteenmilesbyfiveandahalf。

Eden，describingtheneighbourhoodofCoventry，says：’Inacountryparish

ononesidethecity，chieflyconsistingofcottagesinhabitedbyribbon-weavers，

theRatesareashighasinCoventry；whilst，inanotherparish，ontheopposite

side，theydonotexceedone-thirdoftheCityRate：thisisascribedto

thecarethatistakentopreventmanufacturersfromsettlingintheparish。’(33*)