(d) Provision of work in many districts in most counties of the east.

But in the east and south-east there was at any rate sometimes a chronic want of employment, and consequently numerous efforts to provide for the ablebodied poor. In the country round Hitchen we are told, as in the Reading district, that it is the poor in the town that are distressed, but in the hamlets the farmers find work for the inhabitants. The justices say they have no manufacture, and they do not know how to find a remedy for the people in the town. At one time they make the richer people employ the poor, but they do not find the experiment successful'. We have also an account of a permanent want of employment in a large district of Norfolk. In the hundreds of South Greenhoe, Wayland, and Grimshoe provision had been made by raising a stock to set the able-bodied poor to work, and besides the magistrates write, "Wee have manie young people wch live out of service by reason of the multitude of them, there not being services for them, but worke is provided for them in their seuerall parishes?."

There are very many reports of stocks for the provision of work in other country districts of the east. In Hertfordshire, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Cambridge there is much to make us think the system was nearly general, and in each of the other eastern counties there are many cases of the kind.

10. Shropshire. Bishop's Castle. Vol. 223, 39. 3rd Oct. 1632. "Here is herin but one church wherin are churchwardens, ouerseers of the poore duely elected and nominated; and monthly now we meete and we take order for mayntenance of the poore by setting the able to work and relief of the impotent."

11. Somerset. Frome, Kilmerston, Wellow and the adjoining districts. Vol. 185, 40. Feb. 163. The justices have seen to the relief of the poor and setting them to work.

12. Warwick. Knightlow. Vol. 199, 65. 13 Sept. 1631. "The Constables, Churchwardens and Ouerseers for the poore in the rest of the townes in theis two divisions doe certfie vs that all ys well.... the poore are sett on worke and releiued and wee heare noe complaints to the contrarie."

1 D. S. P., Vol. 427, 3. 1st Aug. 1639, Vol. 385, 43, and 349, 70.

2 Ib., Vol. 385, 27. March 5, 1637.

3 Herts. Edwinstree and Odsey. Ib., Vol. 426, 73. July 29, 1639. The justices "haue directed stocks of money to be raised where need is to sett the poore on worke." See also above for hundreds of Hertford and Braughing, St Albans borough, and liberty of St Albans.

In a district of Middlesex the unemployed were sent to fight for Gustavus Adolphus', but in most parishes materials were provided for them to work up. Thus in several hundreds in Kent "stocks of materialls" were provided in every parish2; in Nottinghamshire those out of service and able to work were set to work "on the towne stocks," while at Horncastle sessions, in Lincolnshire, the justices take "special care...that the abler sort bee constantly sett on worke by the stocke of the parishe1."

Suffolk. Hartismere. Vol. 349, 12. March 1639. "Those who are able to worke and cannot provide worke for themselues are sett to worke."

Cosford. Vol. 395, 35. July, 1638. The justices have "bin careful for the setting of poore people work," etc.

Hundreds of Loes, Wilford, Thredling and Flomesgate. 13th July, 1638. Vol. 395, No. 55. See App. XII.

Also Hundreds of Carlford and Colneis. Vol. 395, 62. July, 1638, and Ipswich, Vol. 195, 45.

Norfolk. South Erpingham and Eynsford. July, 1638. Vol. 395, 90. The justices have "taken care . . . for the employment of the able," &c.

Division not mentioned. July, 1634. "We haue caused stockes to be raysed in the severall parishes of our limitts to sett the poore beinge able of bodye to worke." Vol. 272, 60.

For Freebridge Lynn, Freebridge Marshland and Clackclose; South Greenhoe, Wayland, and Grimshoe; and also Lynn, see above.

Cambridge. Hundreds of Cheveley, Staploe, Staine and Flendish (formerly all in Cambs.), "Item wee find upon our inquiry that the seuerall towne Stockes within or diuision are orderly imployed and accounted for and the poore of the seueral parishes sett one worke and imployed therin according to the Lawe." Vol. 285, 99. March, 1635. Chesterton, Papworth and North Stowe. 216, 45. See App. XII. Radfield, Chilford and Whittlesford. Vol. 395, 114,

and Cambridge borough. See above.

1 24th Oct. 1631. Ib., Vol. 202, 20. Report for Clerkenwell, St Sepulchre, St Giles, Islington, Finchley, Friarne, etc. "There is alsoe in the house of Correccon a manufacture prepared and by a charitable stocke of a hundred pounds given by Sr John Fenner Knight nowe in readynes an Artizan, who hath Articled and agreed wth vs to take, instructe & bringe vp in the saide manufacture as apprentices twenty poore orphans boyes and Girles such as before wandred in the streetes and weare readie to perishe for wante of imployment." "Many idle and loose persons haue byn lately imployed and sent to serue under his matie of Sweden and such others as are taken up in watches or Privie Searches wthin or division are continually settled in some course of life or sent to the howse of Correccon." See also Appendix XII.

2 Ruxley, Little, Lesnex, Axton, and the vill of Dartford and Wilmington. D. S. P., Chas. I., Vol. 220, 14. July 4th, 1632.

Sometimes the sum expended was very considerable if we take into account the great difference in the value of money. Thus in Wallington, Surrey, more than £120 was used for providing work, while nearly fifty pounds remained in hand1. On the whole therefore in the eastern counties, between 1631 and 1640, it seems that considerable sums of money were raised and employed in most districts2 with the object of setting to work the able-bodied poor.

We have thus seen that in 1631 the improvement in the administration of poor relief concerned especially

ΙΟ. Sum

the relief of the able-bodied poor, and we have mary.

1 D. S. P., Vol. 315, 25. March, 1635. "Item. Money disbursed to set the poore on woorke.

Itm. Moneys in stocke for the settinge of the poore to worke.

2 The following are instances in which work for the poor was provided in some district in every other eastern county:

Sussex. Rape of Bramber. Ib., Vol. 189, 16. April, 1631. The justices "haue compelled some that misspent their tyme to fall to labor and haue provided worke for them and others that alleaged they wanted worke." Bedford. See above.

Bucks. Boro' of Buckingham. Vol. 201, 13. 3rd Oct., 1631.

"Our poore

are kept to work and or stock is still going, wee have noe poore that begg." Oct. 3rd, 1631. See above also.

Essex. Vol. 188, 92. April, 1631. Great want of work; the justices "haue not only delt wth the able men of parishes to prouide and laie in corne for prouision of the poore at under-rates but did cause them to raise stockes and meanes to sett their poore on worke."

Hunts. Hundred of Hurstington. Vol. 329, 83. 1636. Signed by Sir Oliver Cromwell, H. Cromwell and Robert Audeley. The justices called before them the overseers of the poor and caused them "to render vs an accompt what stocks of money haue beene raysed for settinge the poore on worke and howe the poore haue beene releiued. Whoe haue made it appear before vs that the statute in this case hath beene duely obserued throughout the said hundred."

Leicester. West Goscote. Vol. 349, 35. March, 1639. The justices relieve and set to work poor people, punish rogues, and put all instructions of the Book of orders into execution, "wch course wee finde very beneficiall and much conducinge to the generall quiett and goode of the countrey and wee therefore wth more cheerefullnes addresse ourselues thereunto."

Lincolnshire. Horncastle Sessions. Vol. 349, 113. 14th March, 1639. The justices" haue taken speciall care.... that the abler sorte bee constantly sett on worke by the stocke of the parishe."

Rutland. Vol. 185, 55. Feb., 163f. The justices state that "order is taken (according to lawe) for reliefe and setting to worke of poore and impotent people."

noted many instances in which taxes were raised for this purpose at that time. We have also examined a detailed report from a particular district in the county of Nottingham in which in forty-five out of sixty parishes some provision seems to have been made for finding employment for the poor. Moreover, we find that the plan of providing work for the unemployed was reported from some district of every county south of the Humber except Cornwall, Northampton, Devon, and Wilts; and in Devon and Wilts also the same plan was tried, although no report of the justices has been preserved. This form of poor relief thus seems to have been frequently in use in the towns of both east and west, and in the country districts of the eastern counties also. It was not quite so general in the country districts of the west, but still was not infrequent even there.

We may, therefore, say that from 1631 to 1640 we had more poor relief in England than we ever had before or since. We shall try to estimate later how far this system was successful. But we will now see what happened to the organisation of English poor relief during the Civil War. We will also trace the history of poor relief in France and Scotland during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in order that we may see that the history of poor relief in England is unique.

CHAPTER XIII.

POOR RELIEF IN FRANCE, SCOTLAND, AND ENGLAND DURING

THE CIVIL WAR AND COMMONWEALTH.

§ 1. Lax administration of poor relief in England during the years of Civil War.

§ 2. Attempts to regain a good organisation of poor relief under the Commonwealth.

§ 3. Reasons why disorganisation especially affected the provision of work for the unemployed.

§ 4. State of poor relief after the Restoration.

§ 5. Reasons for failure under the Commonwealth to restore the old state of things.

§ 6. History of legislation on poor relief in Scotland,

§ 7. Failure of administration of poor relief in Scotland during the seventeenth century.

a. Responses of the Scotch justices to the orders of Council in 1623 show that they were unable or unwilling to enforce the poor law themselves and left it to the kirk sessions.

b. Inadequate poor relief granted by the kirk sessions of Banff.

c.

Relief of the poor in Aberdeen shows that the relief considered sufficient by the municipal rulers was double that which could be granted from the funds at the disposal of the kirk sessions.

d. Infrequency of assessment in Scotland before 1818.

e. Insufficiency of relief during the years 1692-1699.

f. Prevalence of begging in Scotland.

9.

Reasons for the failure of Scotch administration.

§ 8. The history of poor relief in France.

§ 9. Comparison between the history of poor relief in England and that in France and Scotland.

THE histories of poor relief in England after the Civil War, and in France and in Scotland throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, both compare and contrast with the