Female Poor Law Guardians 1862-1929: A National Study
Home > Female Poor Law Guardians 1862-1929: A National Study
In this blog Steven King (Nottingham Trent University), Jan Overfield Shaw (formerly National Trust) and Elizabeth Hurren (University of Leicester) present their research, which was supported by a grant from the EHS.
—
In his 7 July 2015 BBC online reflection, Brian Wheeler asked ‘How did we get to this welfare state?’ Written against the backdrop of the Coalition Government’s welfare reform and austerity plan, the article provided a whistlestop tour of welfare from the Elizabethan era through workhouses, to the welfare state of the 1940s and Thatcher, and onto Iain Duncan Smith. As in so many histories of the British welfare state before and since, the 1890s and early 1900s were identified as a key developmental period in terms of knowledge and policy, with the development of the old age pension and much else, for which male politicians and policymakers are normally given the credit.
Yet, certainly from the early 1890s (when electoral rules on the property qualifications needed to stand for local office were changed) and arguably earlier, women played an increasingly prominent role in the local administration of welfare. First middle-class women and then their working-class counterparts stood for election as Guardians under the new Poor Law. Increasingly they won. In the early stages these women focused on the electoral narrative that they could improve the lot of women and children given that these were ‘domestic issues’ to which they were well-suited. Think clothing, underwear, apprenticeships and the quality of food. Some did just this. Other used their education, personality or class power to extend their reach and influence over the whole business of the local administration of welfare. In (short) time these pioneers were followed by new waves of women who did not even try to disguise their intent to create a maternalist welfare system.
Why then are these women ‘missing’, especially when we note the excellent early work of Pat Thane and Patricia Hollis in this area? In part the answer is that they are difficult to find in the local election data reported by (some) newspapers, something well-captured in Joelle Gorno’s ongoing PhD on women in public life in Wales. Even when we do find them, uncovering their work and impact is a task that has often been seen to require wading through mounds of Guardians Minute Books. Some of these are dry affairs, and all are to some extent curated given that newspaper reporters were often present at such meetings. And, of course, the lives of upper middle-class guardians, male and female, are easier to find and elaborate than their working-class counterparts.
There is also, however, a sense that we just need to try harder to look at the lives of these missing women. We now know, for instance, that Poor Law Union clerks sent annual lists of elected guardians to the central authorities in London. These returns lie buried in series MH12. Family historians and volunteer researchers at workhouse museums have proved themselves adept at reconstructing the lives of ‘their’ female guardians. Also, a series of working papers and diaries for prominent and not-so-prominent female guardians have begun to come to light. The records may exist for a first national history of female guardians between the 1860s and the abolitions of the New Poor Law.
Our project team – Steven King of Nottingham Trent University, Jan Overfield Shaw (formerly National Trust) and Elizabeth Hurren of the University of Leicester – will work with a number of partners to create and use such a national history. This includes the workhouse museum sites represented by the workhouse network – Workhouse Network Home Page – the Family and Community Historical Research Society, The National Archives, and numerous family history and volunteer groups. Together we will try to understand the scale, reach and impact of female guardians and to reconstruct as many of their detailed lives as possible. As well as academic outputs, our research will feed into museum interpretation, theatre productions, and a range of other creative outputs. We ask ‘what difference did the work of these women – determined as they were to create a maternalist system – make to the lives of the poor and their experience of welfare? By extension we might ask what difference such an approach to the current crisis of the welfare state might make? A grant from the Economic History Society is helping us begin this process of creating a national history.
To contact the author:
Steven King
Nottingham Trent University
