1753 HENRY FIELDING'S PROPOSAL FOR THE POOR 038. FIELDING, Henry. A proposal for making an effectual provision for the Poor, for amending their morals, and for rendering them useful members of the society. To which is added, a plan of the buildings proposed, with proper elevations. Drawn by an eminent hand. London: Printed for A. Millar. 1753. [4],91,[1]p. With a large folding plan. Rebound in quarter calf, marbled boards. First and last leaf browned otherwise a very good copy. HIGGS 610. KRESS 5260. GOLDSMITHS 8844. CROSS III, 325, RDTHSCHILD 854. Higgs comments; "A remarkable proposal: which seems to have attracted very general notice. The folding plan of the 'Poor House' is by Thom. Gibson. Fielding makes a bold claim for his plan: "If this be carried into execution, it will in its consequence, I am convinced, remove almost every evil from the society of which honest men at present complain..." He begins in the pre-Malthusian conviction that the greater the numbers of a nation's population, the greater its strength, quoting Locke to that effect: "'Numbers of Men' ,says Mr. Locke, ' are to be preferred to largeness of dominions'". This is only so however if all members. of society contribute effectively to its economy. Therefore it is wise and just that everyone with the exception only of those who "labour under any utter incapacity" i.e. the old, the very young, the sick or the insane should be obliged to contribute to "the strength and wealth of the public". It is the duty of the rich to seek public office and make their contribution to society that way; if they do not at least they will spend and thus contribute to the good of the public. It is not so with the Poor: "For having nothing but their labour to bestow on the Society, if they withhold this from it, they become useless members; and having nothing but their labour to procure a support for themselves, they must of necessity become buthensome." It is therefore clear that just as the poor have a duty to work, the state a right to compel them to do so. Since the time of Elizabeth I attempts had been made by government to make effective provision for the poor: yet in 1753 the poor remain a great and increasing problem. "That the Poor are a very great burthen, and even a nuisance to this kingdom; that the laws for relieving their distresses, and restraining their vices, have not answered those purposes; and that they are at present very ill provided for, and much worse governed, are Truths which every man, I believe, will acknowledge. " Exorbitant poor rates are levied and yet the poor live in conditions of ever-increasing want and deprivation. And here the predicament of the poor merits our compassion. Their misdeeds annoy everyone but their sufferings are little known: "They starve, and freeze, and rot among themselves; but they beg, and steal, and rob among their betters. There is not a parish in Westminster which doth not raise thousands annually for the Poor, and there is not a street in that liberty which doth not swarm all day with beggars, and all night with thieves." So "national and atrocious a grievance", Fielding goes on, must be presumed irremediable if, after so many efforts, no remedy has been found. Undeterred, he then proceeds to reveal his "Proposal". For this he feels himself well equipped "...having read over and considered all the Laws in any wise relating to the Poor, with the utmost care and attention and having been many years very particularly concerned in the execution of them." The "Proposal itself" suggests that a county Work-House with House of Correction attached be erected in Middlesex capable of admitting five thousand people or more. Men and women were to be kept separate. Any vagrants or petty criminals, upon conviction, could be be sent into the Work-House, or the County House of Correction. Any citizen shall have the power to confine any suspected vagrant etc. until a Constable can be found to carry the suspect before a justice. If the suspect prove a "wanderer or idle person" the justice shall commit him or her to the County- House or House of Correction. Any poor persons wishing to travel further than six miles from their place of abode must get a pass from the magistrates. Each inmate of the County-House must wear a large badge on his shoulder. Inmates all rise at four a. m. , go to prayers at five and the hours of work in the House of Correction shall be from six in the morning until seven at night. For the first few weeks a sum of two shillings shall be advanced to inmates of the Work-House until the produce of their labour can come to be sold. The Work-House shall accept those who apply for voluntary admission. Inmates of the Hose may be hired out by the governor to any gentleman or person of standing in need of hands. Any inmate conspiring with others and attacking any of the guards or officers of the House, upon conviction, to be sentenced to death. Any persons committed to the House who refuse to work shall be liable to be transported. Any officer introducing spirituous liquors into the House to be liable to imprisonment. Any persons destroying the furniture, tools or work produced in the House to be liable to corporal punishment, "not extending to life or limb" . Anyone escaping from the House of Correction to be severely whipt. All these and rules and many others to be under the direction and control of the governor who shall hold regular courts within the House itself. In a final section Fielding explains and defends his plan. He intended that the County Work-House and House of Correction in Middlesex should be a model for the rest of the country. Some might be surprised at the size of the proposed Work-House; but, to "make the poor useful members of the society", it was necessary, he believed, to gather all the poor of each county together. Small workhouse were inefficient and often very ill-run; the officers and wardens being often of poor quality. The governors of the workhouses in Fielding's scheme would need to be men of considerable abilities and would need proper payment for their work. Economies of scale, better management and increased efficiency could only be obtained in these large new institutions. Fielding quotes Hale Petty and Child who had earlier argued that the poor of several parishes should be brought together for their better management. Fielding makes it very clear that his new Workhouses are not intended for the impotent poor, the sick, the very young etc. Quoting Petty again, he estimates that the numbers of the important poor are really quite inconsiderable; perhaps only one in five hundred. What he aims at the the able poor, such as cannot or will not find work. Though costly at the outset, his new scheme would, in the long run, involve large savings and, what is more, be effective where the present system was not. He defends himself against the possible charge of infringing the liberty of poor people by his rules controlling "Vagrancy, or wandering about from place to place." About this he is unapologetic, considering the lack of laws against vagrancy, a severe defect in the legal system. This pamphlet was produced for the public good by a man nearing the end of his life. His constitution was in decline and he knew it. For many years he had worked as a Middlesex Magistrate and had a detailed knowledge of the problems of crime, vagrancy, begging and poverty in the growing metropolis. He was one of the first and one of the most important of those to address the question of the balance between liberty and order in an increasingly complex urban society. It seems perhaps ironic to find the humane author of Joseph Andrews advocating a national system of Work- Houses, with such strict regimes and draconian rules. Forbidding the poor to travel freely without orders from a magistrate seems to be a reinforcement of those Laws of Settlement which Adam Smith found so unjust an imposition on the poor. But Fielding was dealing with an old problem presenting itself in London on an unprecedented scale. The relentless and rational nature of the plan make it seem like an early essay in utilitarian social control. But drastic measures were called for. No one may doubt the genuinely philanthropic inspiration of the proposal. But as a social engineer Fielding is attempting to impose a rational system upon human nature which as a novelist he must have known it was not capable of receiving. His utopian plan was never implemented. It was tried at Shrewsbury under the direction of Isaac Wood. But there. after an initial period of success, it was doomed to failure, as all schemes of putting the poor to work had been and were doomed to be.