PAP 064

The Poet and The Paupers

X.064


Object: to give essential employment to the labouring class. 1. Every farm to have in constant employment labourers in proportion of one man to every 25 Rental to the Poor Rate. 2. A labourer’s rate to be levied. Every occupier of land to employ or pay. 3. Wages to be 2 shillings per day married man; 1 shilling 6 pence single upwards of 18 years; below in proportion. To apply to able-bodied labourers. 4. Every married man earning 2 shillings per day shall support himself, his wife and children. 5. That in making a general increase in their rate of wages, this meeting has been solely influenced by a desire to improve the condition of the industrious labourers as they feel persuaded that by such means they shall be promoting the moral and religious improvement of the poor and thus perform the best service which they can to God and their country. The resolution was signed “CHICHESTER”. Twenty-two other men appended their signatures. Richard Lower was not among them, for he was merely the Clerk who wrote out the Minutes, not by any means a principal rate-payer in the parish. The hypocrisy in Paragraph 5 leaves one undecided whether to laugh or cry. It would, perhaps, be asking too much for a meeting with so august a chairman to have acknowledged that it was acting under the duress imposed upon it by the riots sweeping across the county, but to insist that it had been “solely influenced by a desire to improve the condition of the industrious labourers” could scarcely have been a true statement. In fact it did little to improve that condition, for although granting a general all-round increase in wages, it simultaneously cut the scales of Poor Law Relief by insisting that every man earning 2s. a day should support his family without help from the parish no matter how many children he had. It also placed an additional burden on the small farmers who employed no hired labour, artisans and such as Richard Lower, who had to pay the new Labourer’s Rate as occupiers but employed no one.Indeed it would seem from this resolution that the Chiddingly men were like those of Withyham, unwilling to join their more adventurous (outrageous? – the choice of adjective depends upon the point of view) neighbours. In Brede, where the paupers made a powerful noise, Poor Law expenditures rose from Ł1765 in 1830 to Ł2606 in 1832, whilst wages were fixed at 2s. 3d. per day. In Eastbourne, where fires burned every night, Poor Law expenditure increased by 20% from 1831 to 1832. In Chiddingly, the Poor Rate levied was 13s. 6d. in 1829; 12s. 6d. in 1830; and 13s. in 1831 and 1832. The fact that the Chiddingly labourers gained so little from the “Swing Riots” is a strong argument against their having damaged the Jeffrays Memorial in 1830.

Object: to give essential employment to the labouring class.

1.     Every farm to have in constant employment labourers in proportion of one man to every 25 Rental to the Poor Rate.

2.     A labourer’s rate to be levied. Every occupier of land to employ or pay.

3.     Wages to be 2 shillings per day married man; 1 shilling 6 pence single upwards of 18 years; below in proportion. To apply to able-bodied labourers.

4.     Every married man earning 2 shillings per day shall support himself, his wife and children.

5.     That in making a general increase in their rate of wages, this meeting has been solely influenced by a desire to improve the condition of the industrious labourers as they feel persuaded that by such means they shall be promoting the moral and religious improvement of the poor and thus perform the best service which they can to God and their country.

The resolution was signed “CHICHESTER”. Twenty-two other men appended their signatures. Richard Lower was not among them, for he was merely the Clerk who wrote out the Minutes, not by any means a principal rate-payer in the parish.

The hypocrisy in Paragraph 5 leaves one undecided whether to laugh or cry. It would, perhaps, be asking too much for a meeting with so august a chairman to have acknowledged that it was acting under the duress imposed upon it by the riots sweeping across the county, but to insist that it had been “solely influenced by a desire to improve the condition of the industrious labourers” could scarcely have been a true statement. In fact it did little to improve that condition, for although granting a general all-round increase in wages, it simultaneously cut the scales of Poor Law Relief by insisting that every man earning 2s. a day should support his family without help from the parish no matter how many children he had. It also placed an additional burden on the small farmers who employed no hired labour, artisans and such as Richard Lower, who had to pay the new Labourer’s Rate as occupiers but employed no one.Indeed it would seem from this resolution that the Chiddingly men were like those of Withyham, unwilling to join their more adventurous (outrageous? – the choice of adjective depends upon the point of view) neighbours. In Brede, where the paupers made a powerful noise, Poor Law expenditures rose from Ł1765 in 1830 to Ł2606 in 1832, whilst wages were fixed at 2s. 3d. per day. In Eastbourne, where fires burned every night, Poor Law expenditure increased by 20% from 1831 to 1832. In Chiddingly, the Poor Rate levied was 13s. 6d. in 1829; 12s. 6d. in 1830; and 13s. in 1831 and 1832. The fact that the Chiddingly labourers gained so little from the “Swing Riots” is a strong argument against their having damaged the Jeffrays Memorial in 1830.

Copyright:This section is Copyright, the Author, 1980-2004. Copying of any of this material for other than individual, personal use is prohibited. Use of the materials, concepts and story contained in this section for any commercial use, any other money-making activity of any sort, or any type of academic activity is prohibited without the express, written permission of the author.