top of page
Search
Writer's pictureClyve Rose

UBI in Regency England

Following on from my post last week about The Revolt of the Housewives, I promised you a little post about the Speenhamland System - which was really an early form of Universal Basic Income.


New laws were needed:

The Speenhamland System was a form of outdoor relief designed to alleviate rural poverty in England and Wales during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. It was an amendment to the Elizabethan Poor Law (the Poor Relief Act of 1601), and introduced as a response to the economic hardships indirectly caused by Britain's involvement in the French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Napoleonic Wars (1793–1815).

It was the 1795 food riots (led by women) that forced parliament to consider updating the Poor Laws and finding better ways to take care of the worst-off in society. This included veterans returning from the wars in France, many of whom were wounded and unable to return to their previous employments on the land. Veterans’ Affairs isn’t a new idea. It’s been around since people first stood together to fight against other people.

Now, while these updated rules for assisting the indigent and hungry were sold to the populace as ‘we, your leaders and rulers, have heard you,’ let’s please remember that this system was introduced against the backdrop of the French Revolution and the subsequent Reign of Terror (wherein many French aristocrats literally lost their heads).

The house of lords also had to watch a man of ignoble birth crown himself emperor of their nearest neighbour – aided and abetted by the people he claimed to free. Many of the noble families of England may have felt a sudden need to consider the workers of England in a way they'd likely never given much thought to before.

So, yes, this system came into being to alleviate the struggles of the English poor, but let’s not kid ourselves that those in power (both in the upper and lower houses of parliament) were acting from entirely altruistic motives.


The Speenhamland Wage Supplements:

Basically, a bunch of local magistrates sat down at a pub (The Pelican Inn) on 6 May 1795 and decided that instead of setting minimum wages for poor labourers, workers' incomes ought to be supplemented to a predetermined level, with the funds provided by parish rates. The system involved a means-tested sliding-scale of wage supplements to mitigate the effects of rural poverty – much like many government assistance schemes today.

    This allowance was based on the price of three gallon loaves of bread per week for each man (a gallon loaf weighed about 8.5 pounds or 4 kilograms), along with an additional 1.5 loaves for a wife and each child. This amount was intended to cover all living expenses (because women eat the same amount as their kids, apparently - and what if they were pregnant?).

Families received additional payments to top up wages to a set level, as per the table described by the magistrates. This table varied, based on the number of children in your family, and the market price of bread. Under this system, when the cost of a gallon loaf of bread reached one shilling, every poor and industrious man was entitled to a weekly income of 3 shillings, either from his family’s labour or through allowances from the Poor Rates (the latter was paid out of the parish rates).

Unlike previous poverty alleviation measures, the Speenhamland system didn't require employment as a condition for receiving benefits. It combined existing out-of-work relief - with or without a job guarantee - with a new system of in-work benefits, effectively creating a basic income. The level of relief provided was consistent regardless of whether your family members were employed, and it didn't decrease as your wages increased, addressing concerns that people might be discouraged from working.

The system was mostly effective in its goals of:

  • alleviating poverty

  • reducing malnutrition

  • helping prevent riots


As a result, it was widely adopted, and there was even an attempt to incorporate it into national legislation, despite the valid point that the scale intentionally muted wage inflation compared to price increases; a 43% rise in bread prices resulted in only a 30% increase in wages, effectively reducing the breadwinner's purchasing power overall.

    The Speenhamland system reached its peak during the Napoleonic Wars, serving as a tool to ease the discontent of the rural poor facing steep food prices. However, the system was not without its challenges and faced further criticism over time, gradually declining in use after the wars, with some exceptions in certain parishes.


Who paid?

The cost of the wage supplements initially fell on local landowners (i.e. the landed gentry). Thus, the noble houses of England began exploring alternative methods of supporting the poor, such as workhouses funded through parish unions. It's these workhouses we see depicted so brutally in Victorian fiction like Dickens's Oliver Twist.

In 1834, the Report of the Royal Commission into the Operation of the Poor Laws called the Speenhamland System a "universal system of pauperism." Critics argued that it allowed employers to pay below-subsistence wages (which was demonstrably true), relying on the parish to supplement workers' incomes (remind you of anything, Australia? COUGH Jobseeker).

It also reminds me of the US tip-based system, if the tips paid to service staff were paid by the city. Both of these systems allow employers to underpay, and rely on outside supplements to make employment worthwhile.


Gone by 1834:

Some reformers believed the Speenhamland System would lead to increased population growth, creating further strain on resources. Others suggested it created a poverty trap, reducing work incentives and food production.


The Speenhamland system was eventually replaced by the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, which sought to discourage supplementing wages (big shock).

67 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Waterloo

Comments


bottom of page