UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Victorian workhouse : bastille or pauper palace? Sanders, Areta 1984

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1984_A8 S26.pdf [ 17.68MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0096253.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0096253-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0096253-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0096253-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0096253-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0096253-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0096253-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE VICTORIAN WORKHOUSE: BASTILLE OR PAUPER PALACE? by ARETA SANDERS B.A., The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1980 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of History, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April 1984 © Areta Sanders 1984 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference and study. I further agree that permission f o r extensive copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by h i s or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date DE-6 (3/81) i i ABSTRACT The image of the V i c t o r i a n workhouse i s one of a " b a s t i l l e " : a b u i l d i n g designed to be a d e t e r r e n t without c o n s i d e r a t i o n of s t y l e , beauty or comfort. But i s t h i s a true p i c t u r e ? T h i s t h e s i s does not attempt to destroy the image or myth, but to examine i t in an a n a l y t i c a l way to d i s c o v e r what f a c t o r s determined the design and c o n s t r u c t i o n of a union workhouse, and to what extent ideology shaped the a r c h i t e c t u r e and embodied the s o c i a l purpose of the Commissioners. Examination of the b u i l d i n g s as a r c h i t e c t u r e w i t h i n t h e i r s o c i a l contexts i s where t h i s t h e s i s departs from previous r e s e a r c h . Work has been l i m i t e d , to date, on the su b j e c t of workhouses. Norman Longmate has w r i t t e n a general h i s t o r y of the workhouse, Anne Digby has made a l o c a l study of the Poor Law and i t s attendant workhouses i n N o r f o l k , Margaret Crowther has examined them as a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n and tra c e d the process of change from 1834 to 1929, and most r e c e n t l y Anna D i c k i n s has w r i t t e n a Ph.D. t h e s i s on the a r c h i t e c t s and the union workhouse. Among the sources i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r t h i s paper were the Report from H.M. Commissioners on the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and  P r a c t i c a l Operation of the Poor Laws, and t h e i r subsequent Annual Reports. Contemporary opin i o n has been sought from magazine a r t i c l e s and books, together with the opinions and experiences of the a r c h i t e c t s i n v o l v e d . Boards of Guardians' i i i Minute Books, plans and specifications have also been studied and v i s i t s to a number of workhouses which have not been too • d r a s t i c a l l y altered, have added to the printed word, insight, and a " f e e l " for the building. Comparisons have also been made with other i n s t i t u t i o n s and housing, using where possible, the opinions of contemporary architects and builders, in order that the workhouse may be c r i t i c i z e d in the context of Victorian architecture. In order to discover how the 1834 workhouse related to e a r l i e r i n s t i t u t i o n s , contemporary surveys and pamphlets concerned with pre-1834 workhouses have been studied. No neat and concise conclusion emerges from this study. Although the Poor Law Commissioners fervently believed in Jeremy Bentham's princi p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " and wished to incorporate i t into the design of these new workhouses, this was only one of many ^ elements that influenced their design. The Boards of Guardians who were ultimately responsible for financing workhouse building were moved not only by ideology but by, among other things, considerations of c i v i c pride, economy and local t r a d i t i o n . Ideology, and the desire to erect an impressive public i n s t i t u t i o n incorporating the technological advances that occurred throughout the century, which in turn lent prestige to the Boards of Guardians, was reconciled by the sharp contrast between i n t e r i o r and exterior. The elaborate facade belied the u t i l i t a r i a n i n t e r i o r , which was planned to sa t i s f y the "principles of separation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n " laid down by the Commissioners, and reflected an attitude toward building for the poor which was evident in other contemporary buildings. We find that workhouse design had much in common with other contemporary 1 V i n s t i t u t i o n s , housing for the poor, and surprisingly enough, a link with country house architecture. Pressure from local magnates to build aesthetically pleasing structures in the v i c i n i t y of t h e i r houses also influenced the architecture, and was encouraged by architects who were concerned to enhance the i r own reputation, rather than being associated with a "prison-like" building. Union workhouses were not completely new and innovative, they reflected a similar ideology and therefore similar p rinciples of planning, to workhouses established before 1834 and both aroused c r i t i c a l comment. Consequently, there was both continuity and change at work in these i n s t i t u t i o n s . We f i n d , therefore, that the design of union workhouses resulted from an amalgam of diverse influences, both ideological and practical, and i t is s i m p l i s t i c to assume that they were b u i l t purely as the " b a s t i l l e s " of popular legend. Instead, they represent one more example of Victorian architecture - complex and f u l l of c o n f l i c t and incongruity. V Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor James Winter for his time and for his ever constructive suggestions and c r i t i c i s m . I am grateful to Dr. Anna Dickens for giving me the benefit of her research and helping me to make the best use of a brief v i s i t to England. F i n a l l y , thanks are due to my husband, John, for his constant support and encouragement and countless hours of babysitting. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract i i Acknowledgements v Li s t of Figures ' v i i INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 The Intentions of the Commissioners and contemporary design ideology 3 CHAPTER 2 The Problem of Application 15 CHAPTER 3 Civic Pride vs. Ideology 27 CHAPTER 4 -Inside vs. Outside 32 CHAPTER 5 Continuity or Change 40 CONCLUSION 56 Footnotes 60 Selected Bibliography 68 F i gures 73 LIST OF FIGURES v 1 1 Fig.No, 1 2 3 8 9 10 11 12 T i t l e and Source Plan of a Rural Workhouse by Sir Francis Bond Head. BPP F i r s t Annual Report of the  Commissioners under the Poor Law  Amendment Act 1835 XXXV Bentham's Panopticon, The Works of Jeremy Bentham. Hexagon Plan of a Workhouse plan - Sampson Kempthorne, F i r s t Annual Report. ground Hexagon Plan of a Workhouse - one pair plan - Sampson Kempthorne, F i r s t Annual Report. Hexagon Plan of a Workhouse - two pair plan - Sampson Kempthorne, F i r s t Annual Report. Square Plan of a Workhouse plan - Sampson Kempthorne, F i r s t Annual Report. ground Square Plan of a Workhouse - one pair plan - Sampson Kempthorne, F i r s t Annual Report. Panopticon House of Industry, Robin Evans, Fabrication of Virtue. P lan. of Bear Wood , Mark Girouard, The Victorian Country House, Dunmow Union Workhouse, David Cole, The Work of Sir George-Gilbert Scott. Amersham Union Workhouse, David Cole. Aylsham Workhouse, Architectural History 1978 B l i c k l i n g Hall, The Buildings of England N. E'. Norfolk and Norwich, Nikolaus Pevsner. Page 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 82 83 V 1 1 1 F i g . No. T i t l e and S o u r c e Page 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 E l y W o r k h o u s e . P h o t o g r a p h by A r e t a S a n d e r s , May 1983, E l y C a t h e d r a l . P h o t o g r a p h by A r e t a S a n d e r s , May 1983 W i n d s o r U n i o n W o r k h o u s e , D a v i d C o l e . K e l h a m Ha l 1, Mark G i r o u a r d The V i c t o r i a n C o u n t r y House. Rye U n i o n W o r k h o u s e . P h o t o g r a p h by A r e t a S a n d e r s , May 1983 . B a t t l e U n i o n Workhouse and B a t t l e A b b e y . P h o t o g r a p h s by A r e t a S a n d e r s , May 1 9 8 3 . C i t y o f London W o r k h o u s e , The B u i l d e r , A u g u s t 11 , 1849 . C i t y o f London Workhouse P l a n , The B u i l d e r , A u g u s t 2 5 , 1849 . K e n s i n g t o n U n i o n W o r k h o u s e , The B u i l d e r , J a n u a r y 1, 1848 . B i r m i n g h a m New W o r k h o u s e , The B u i l d e r , J a n u a r y 3 1 , 1952 . B i r m i n g h a m New Workhouse P l a n , The B u i I d e r , J a n u a r y 3 1 , 1852 . A b i n g d o n W o r k h o u s e , B r i t i s h A l m a n a c , 1835 . D i n i n g Room, M a r y l e b o n e W o r k h o u s e , P a u l Thompson and G i n a . H a r k e l 1 , The  E d w a r d i a n s i n P h o t o g r a p h s . C o l u m b i a S q u a r e , J o h n N e l s o n T a r n , W o r k i n g C l a s s H o u s i n g  i n 1 9 t h C e n t u r y B r i t a i n . I n d u s t r i a l H o u s i n g , J ohn N e l s o n T a r n . S o u t h w e l l W o r k h o u s e , The Rev . J ohn B e c h e r , The A n t i - P a u p e r S y s t e m , G o l d s m i t h K r e s s L i b r a r y 2 8 6 7 8 , 1834 84 84 85 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 9.2 93 94 95 96 97 T i t l e and Source The Incorporated Workhouse of the Hundred of Thurgarton, The Rev. John Becher.. Contrasted Residences for the Poor, A. Welby Pugin, Contrasts. 1 Introduction Anti-Poor Law propaganda, Dore's engravings, Dickens' writings, a continual stream of horror stories from The  Times, a l l have contributed to form the image of the Victorian workhouse as " b a s t i l l e " : a building designed to be a deterrent, without consideration of style, beauty or comfort. The Poor Law Commissioners themselves were convinced of the wisdom of Jeremy Bentham's "less e l i g i b i l i t y " p r i n c i p l e and wished to embody i t in the design of these i n s t i t u t i o n s . That way, they believed they could ensure that the conditions of the inmates would be less e l i g i b l e thannthose of the industrious labourer. Assistant Commissioners like Edwin Chadwick and Sir Francis Bond Head expressed these ideas unequivocally, untroubled by doubt or c o n f l i c t . Yet when we begin to examine more closely examples of Victorian Poor Law i n s t i t u t i o n s , i t is evident that the deterrent factor represented just one of a number of often c o n f l i c t i n g elements expressed in the architecture. Local Boards of Guardians influenced the designs and were moved by, among other things, c i v i c dignity and prestige, local t r a d i t i o n , economic r e s t r a i n t s , notions about aesthetics, architectural harmony and the influence of local magnates, or simply e c c e n t r i c i t y . The architect attempted to incorporate a number of often c o n f l i c t i n g c r i t e r i a into his design, while at the same time sa t i s f y i n g his own aesthetic ideas and thereby enhancing his reputation. These i n s t i t u t i o n s were also subject to the ideas of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and morality 2 which were incorporated in other contemporary buildings and to the technological changes that appeared throughout the century. We w i l l , therefore, examine the factors that afforded these contrasts: the ideology of the Commissioners and the circumstances that governed the actual design and construction, the c o n f l i c t between the Guardians' pride in an impressive c i v i c building incorporating the latest technical achievements, and their attitude toward building for the poor. We w i l l also see that the union workhouse was not completely new and innovative. It owed much to e a r l i e r designs and reflected contemporary building ideology. C r i t i c i s m of the workhouse did not begin after 1834: early workhouses were also vulnerable to c r i t i c a l comment. There had always been an interest in how the Poor Rates were spent as well as a concern for the condition of the poor, and this represents a continuity of attitude rather than an abrupt change. But Poor Law policy was not s t a t i c throughout the century and workhouse architecture provides the tangible evidence of these changing attitudes. It i s , therefore, s i m p l i s t i c to believe that the nineteenth century workhouse was b u i l t purely as the " b a s t i l l e " of popular legend. Instead, the workhouse represents yet another example of Victorian architecture - complex and f u l l of c o n f l i c t and i ncongru i t y . 3 Chapter 1 The intentions of the Commissioners  and contemporary design ideology Following the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 there was an immediate building programme which scattered the countryside with new i n s t i t u t i o n s to accommodate the poor. There was a combination of factors which resulted in this new wave of construction. Increasing poor rates, the agri c u l t u r a l labourers' revolts of 1830 and the obvious widespread distress had prompted the government to appoint a Royal Commission for inquiring into the administration and p r a c t i c a l operation of the Poor Laws. Nassau Senior, who directed the investigation, and Edwin Chadwick were the two most active members and together they were responsible for the Poor Law Report; i t was in response to this report that the government passed the Poor Law Amendment Act. The Commission's objective was to provide necessary r e l i e f without encouraging pauperism. They, therefore, proposed that r e l i e f should be available only in the workhouse, and that the p r i n c i p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " should apply whereby the recipients' "situation on the whole should not be made r e a l l y or apparently so e l i g i b l e as the situation of the 2 independent labourer of the lowest class." They also re-commended that r e l i e f afforded to each class of pauper should "as far as may be practicable be uniform throughout the country." However, they believed that there should be a d e f i n i t e d i s t i n c t i o n between the di f f e r e n t classes of pauper and their treatment and they intended that there should be not one large 4 i n s t i t u t i o n , but separate types for the aged and infirm, for 4 the children, for able-bodied women and the able-bodied men. "For the children i t would provide separate schools away from the influence of the depraved paupers; for the old and infirm i n s t i t u t i o n s of the character of almshouses; for the sick, hospitals." 5 Despite the general condemnation of mixed workhouses found in the Commissioners' Reports and both Chadwick and Senior's personal bias in favour of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n through separate buildings, the plans for the new i n s t i t u t i o n s published in the Annual Report of 1835 recommended one consolidated workhouse. According to the Webbs: "In no Special or General Order, in no Circular or published Minute, can we find any recommendation that a board of guardians should carry out the emphatic recommendations of the 1834 Report in favour of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by i n s t i t u t i o n s . . . " 6 and they appear to believe that "the most energetic subordinate of the Central Authority", 7 S i r Francis Bond Head, supported by Boards- of Guardians who were concerned with the expense of maintaining a series of separate i n s t i t u t i o n s , converted t h e i r Q superiors to this change in poli c y . We find no ambiguities in the architectural intentions of Sir Francis BondllHead who was the Assistant Commissioner responsible for Kent. His ideas were clear and doctrinaire and he expressed the principal of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " in i t s purest form. He drew up the f i r s t of the suggested plans, (fig.1) one for a rural workhouse for f i v e hundred persons, 5 and showed cl e a r l y on the plan his concern that those in receipt of aid should not be more comfortable than those supporting them: "Both plans are founded on the p r i n c i p l e that in the construction of a Rural Workhouse, the height of the rooms, the thickness of the walls etc. should not exceed the dimensions of the cottage of the honest hard working independent labourer; well b u i l t substantial rooms being a luxury as attractive to the pauper as food and raiment." (fig.1) Since rural housing for these independent labourers was generally dilapidated and overcrowded, Head certainly did not intend that paupers should enjoy spacious accommodation, andiihis plans called for inmates to be housed eight to a room 15ft by 10ft. There was to be just one basic d i v i s i o n between male and female, and, therefore, i t was obvious that young and old, lunatic and healthy must have been intended to l i v e together. Head's plan did not provide for the sick, and we can only presume that the inmates were to use the halls as dayrooms for work or schooling. It is unfortunate that Head does not provide an elevation of his design, but from the plan there appears to be no windows on the exterior walls of the building: and, as he specifies cast iron gratings on the i n t e r i o r walls for v e n t i l a t i o n , one wonders how large the windows overlooking the yards were to be, and whether they were capable of opening. In any event, the inmates were e f f e c t i v e l y cut off from the outside world and forced to look inwards, and perhaps by extension, encouraging 6 them to r e f l e c t inwardly. The i n s t i t u t i o n a l nature of the building and the p r i n c i p l e of inspection was emphasized by the bow window over the gateway, which he pointed out "commands a view of the whole establishment." Head's instructions to the builder r e s t r i c t e d the height of the dormitories, no doubt for reasons of economy; yet he specified a 12ft high wall 14 inches thick, regardless of cost, to separate the sexes in the courtyard. He was obviously using bricks and mortar to emphasize the idea of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " , for i t was the separation of families that caused the greatest hardship and acted as the strongest deterrent to entering the workhouse. The influence of Malthus is also evident: the fear that without a physical barrier the pauper would not practice s e l f r e s t r a i n t , but continue to breed in the workhouse and be a further burden on the rates. This was not merely a theoretical conjecture but was supported by evidence presented in the F i r s t Annual Report, where i t was cited that two families were admitted to Bulcamp house of industry andjiproduced children who were born and raised in the workhouse. At the age of thirteen these children were apprenticed by the corporation. After serving th e i r time, the sons married and returned, with their wives, to the workhouse. The process was repeated and there were, at the time of the report, three 9 generations of these paupers in the house of industry. 7 Head expressed his personal convictions in an essay on "English Charity", by conducting a f i c t i t i o u s interview with a labourer, who asked why he should be separated from his wife and f i v e children. After repeating the usua1 I argument that Members of Parliament, soldiers and s a i l o r s are of necessity separated from their families, he continued: " . . . I f you were able to provide for Elizabeth, i f you were able to provide for the children you a 1 ready (in i t a l i c s ) possess, no person would have any di s p o s i t i o n , indeed there exists nowhere any power, to separate you:..." 10 Again in the essay he reiterated the necessity of the deterrent aspect of the workhouse, since he was skeptical that the poor would practice self r e s t r a i n t without a strong incentive. "as soon as workhouse l i f e shall become per se wholesomely repulsive, the rude amorous ploughman w i l l pause a l i t t l e before he contracts a marriage which must ere long make him i t s inmate;..." 11 Head c l e a r l y believed pauperism to be the result of idleness and vice: "Again, i f the robust, well disposed peasant does not li k e poorhouse fare for himself,neither w i l l he li k e i t for his aged Mother: and he w i l l consequently prefer the pleasure of labouring for her support to the drunken enjoyment of Government beer shops." 12 and i t was this opinion that influenced his plans. His design concentrated solely on the idea of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " and was meant to deter the i d l e , and although several workhouses were 13 b u i l t to this plan in Kent i t was not favoured at a l l 14 outside his Kent j u r i s d i c t i o n . 8 The Commissioners' objectives were undoubtedly expressed 15 most f u l l y by t h e i r own architect, Sampson Kempthorne, but at the same time his own a b i l i t i e s and the restraints of time and economy affected his designs. His appointment as o f f i c i a l architect to the Poor Law Commission was a simple case of patronage: his father was a friend of George Nicholls, the 1 fi Chief Poor Law Commissioner, but in 1835 Kempthorne was only twenty-six and recently set up in p r a c t i c e . 1 7 According to George Gilbert Scott, who was a fri e n d , once Kempthorne was appointed, he realized his inexperience and "called in the aid of his old master, Mr. Voysey who though a clever and ingenious practical man, had not one spark of taste, and took a very exaggerated view of the necessity of economy." It i s , therefore, ambiguous whether f i n a n c i a l r e straint was imposed by the Commissioners or was a personal quirk of Voysey. The Assistant Commissioners recommended Kempthorne's employment which meant that he had "a vast practice thrust upon him before his experience had f i t t e d him to conduct i t , while he embarked with a set of ready-made designs of the meanest 1 9 possible character, and very defective in other p a r t i c u l a r s . " Scott's complaint was that the determining factor of these designs was economy where "everything had been cut down to 20 the very quick". However, he did express some understanding of the problem because he had designed churches during the " 'cheap church' mania" in which " . . . a l l decency of architectural 21 f i n i s h and construction was ground down to the very dust,..." 9 It would, therefore, appear that what -had seemed like pure ideology was complicated by considerations of economy when put into practice by the Commissioners' own architect, Kempthorne. The i n t e l l e c t u a l force behind the princ i p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " was Jeremy Bentham, and the contemporary press made the connection between the Commissioners' recommended plans and Bentham's Panopticon. The Architectural Magazine of 1835 described them as "being arranged more or less on 22 the panopticon p r i n c i p l e . . . " Yet, on careful examination of both plans i t is questionable whether a close comparison with Bentham's design can be made. The Panopticon's central organizing p r i n c i p l e was inspection and i t s main feature was a c i r c u l a r building with c e l l s occupying the circumference and an inspector's lodge in the centre from which the inmates could be observed twenty four hours a day with the aid of a specially invented lantern ( f i g . 2 ) . Kempthorne's plans were not c i r c u l a r , but r a d i a l , and although he sited the Master's accommodation in a central core, his a b i l i t y to observe was limited to the view of the yards from his windows, ( f i g . 3 ) . Thus, the p r i n c i p l e of inspection was recognized and u t i l i z e d by Kempthorne to some extent, but to nothing l i k e the degree envisaged by Bentham. Sir Francis Bond Head was also influenced by such an idea in planning a window over the gateway "to observe the whole establishment" and George Gilbert Scott designed the principal entrance of a number of his workhouses 10 to be through an arched gateway leading into an open court in order that the Master might have "the opportunity of seeing from his window every person who is admitted at the gate by which means the conduct of the porter is placed under 23 his control." Bentham's idea of power through architectural design to f a c i l i t a t e surveillance is c l e a r l y expressed, but i t is limited in i t s application. Bentham believed that the Panopticon or inspection house princip l e was applicable to a variety of establishments including penitentiary houses, poor-houses, workhouses, mad-24 houses, lazarettos, hospitals and schools, and according to Robin Evans, i t was Bentham who emphasized the connection 25 between social purpose and architectural forms. Bentham believed that the combination of the physical Panopticon system with an administrative system or "Plan of Management" would have a reforming effect on i t s inmates, resulting in "Morals reformed - health preserved - industry invigorated - instruction diffused - public burthens lightened - economy seated, as i t were, upon a rock - the gordian knot of the Poor Laws not cut, but untied - a l l by a simple idea in Architecture!" 26 This was an attractive theory to men faced with the problems of increasing poor rates and Bentham's friendship and influence on Chadwick is well documented. However, Bentham's e x p l i c i t design for 250 houses of industry to accommodate 2,000 inmates is less well known. They were intended to be "distributed over the face of the country as equally as may be" and he calculated that the average distance between each house would be 10 2/3 m i l e s . 2 7 Robin Evans has d i s t i l l e d the essence of 11 B e n t h a m ' s p l a n s i n h i s new book F a b r i c a t i o n o f V i r t u e . T h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s were t o be i d e n t i c a l " t w e l v e s i d e d p o l y g o n s f r a m e d i n i r o n and s h e a t h e d i n g l a s s i n o r d e r t o e f f e c t ' u n i v e r s a l t r a n s p a r e n c y ' w i t h i n f o r t h e s a k e o f i n s p e c t i o n . M i r r o r s were t o be f i x e d up a r o u n d t h e c e n t r e t o d i r e c t e x t r a l i g h t i n t o t h e g o v e r n o r ' s a p a r t m e n t s and t o g i v e h im u n u s u a l v i e w s o f t h e p a u p e r s a t w o r k . The e x t e r n a l s k i n o f s m a l l g l a s s pane s was h e l d i n a n e t w o r k o f i r o n l e a d i n g s , m u l l i o n s , 28 t r a n s o m s , c o l u m n s and l i n t e l s , w i t h n o t one i n c h o f w a l l i n g . " ( f i g . 8 ) I t was an i n g e n i o u s u se o f modern m a t e r i a l s t o e n f o r c e a p r i n c i p l e and " an e s s a y i n t h e e n g i n e e r i n g o f b e h a v i o u r 29 t h r o u g h t h e m a n i p u l a t i o n o f a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m . " H o w e v e r , B e n t h a m ' s a v a n t g a r d e d e s i g n was i g n o r e d i n f a v o u r o f t h e w e l l known and a c c e p t e d c l a s s i c a l , t u d o r and g o t h i c s t y l e s w h i c h were f a m i l i a r and d i d n o t u t i l i z e t h e medium o f g l a s s as a t o o l f o r o b t a i n i n g power i n ; t h i s way . N e v e r t h e l e s s , a l t h o u g h B e n t h a m ' s s p e c i f i c P a n o p t i c o n s y s t e m was n o t e x e c u t e d as a w o r k h o u s e , h i s b e l i e f i n t h e power o f a r c h i t e c t u r e t o c o n t r o l b e h a v i o u r was a p p a r e n t i n t h e c o n c e p t o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s e p a r a t i o n as a means t o p r e v e n t c o n t a m i n a t i o n o f one g r o u p by a n o t h e r . The p r e o c c u -p a t i o n t o c l a s s i f y and s e p a r a t e was n o t c o n f i n e d t o p a u p e r s o r e ven t o t h e p o o r , b u t i n c l u d e d t h e i n s a n e , p r i s o n e r s , t h e s i c k and e v e n t h e r e s i d e n t s o f a c o u n t r y h o u s e . C l a s s i f i c a t i o n was i n t e n d e d n o t o n l y t o p r e v e n t c o n t a g i o n , b o t h m o r a l and p h y s i c a l , b u t t o a c t as an a g e n t i n i m p r o v i n g t h e l i v e s o f 12 those i t affected, and this contemporary ideology determined the designs of workhouses, lunatic asylums, prisons, hospitals and country houses. Samuel Tuke believed that asylums should be designed to ensure complete separation of the sexes, c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of patients according to t h e i r state of mind, and easy superin-tendence of patients and attendants by their superiors. Patients at the Retreat near York were also divided into classes according to t h e i r property and each used appropriate dayrooms 30 and courts. In this respect there is a marked s i m i l a r i t y between these conditions and those of a workhouse. Robin Evans writes of prisons that "the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of prisoners into groups and the i s o l a t i o n of those groups from one another by means of architectural separation was 31 commonly practiced in the eighteenth century." However, the drive to sub-divide prisoners into classes increased from the beginning of the nineteenth century when there were only four prisons containing ten or more wards; un t i l 1843 32 when there were f i f t y of them. Solitary confinement was rejected because i t was inhumane and d i f f i c u l t to enforce and was replaced by c l a s s i f i c a t i o n which was intended to prevent 33 prisoners from corrupting one another. "E v i l spread -like disease and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was the means of assuaging the 34 epidemic." The concern to arrest the spread of disease was instrumental in changing the design of hospitals from t r a d i t i o n a l blocks to the pavilion type which was best i l l u s t r a t e d by the Royal 13 Naval Hospital at Stonehouse near Plymouth, opened in 1762. This contained a central building which included the chapel and was surmounted by a turret and two pavilions on each side, with a further six added symmetrically along the main axis at a later period - a l l of which were connected by an arcade. ^ 5 S t r i c t attention to separation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was found in most Victorian country houses. There was a concern to separate the sexes to prevent any undue temptation and this was expressed in the practical arrangements of the house. Robert Kerr wrote an i n f l u e n t i a l book e n t i t l e d The Gentleman's House in which he explained the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of apartments. The primary c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was that of family and servants, but these groups were further subdivided and the servants' section contained nine different areas which were grouped 3 6 according to male and female functions. Kerr's principles were pl a i n l y i l l u s t r a t e d in the plan of Bear Wood, the home he designed for John Walter, with i t s separation of functions, special womens' staircase, and mens' corridor. Male and female sleeping quarters were naturally located in different parts of the house and the same segregation applied to servants and single guests, (fig.9) Bear Wood lacked a family chapel, but these became prevalent in country houses in the nineteenth 37 century and attendance at a religious service was, therefore, not only expected of the inmate of a workhouse, but also of the occupants of a country house. And while the workhouse was 14 intended by the Benthamite Commissioners to reform the morals of the pauper, the designs of country houses were intended by th e i r architects and patrons to maintain moral standards. We have seen the influence of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n on a variety of buildings which underlines the point that the workhouse cannot be treated in i s o l a t i o n as a separate architectural form, but was subject to the ideology of contemporary building. 15 Chapter 2  The Problem of Application The most interesting and complex feature in the design of union workhouses is the dichotomy between theory and practice, between eloquently expressed principles and bricks and mortar. The design was influenced not only by ideology but by, among other things, the individual architect, local magnates, guardians, and f i n a n c i a l considerations. Although the recommendations expressed in the Commissioners' Report were c l e a r l y stated, the legal powers to implement these principles were limited and a diverse series of factors affected their p r a c t i c a l application. In their F i r s t Annual Report of 1835 the Poor Law Commissioners provided plans to the local boards for workhouses of d i f f e r e n t sizes, ( f i g s . 3,4,5,6,7,) They did not i n s i s t that the plans be adopted so long as the building had "the requisite 38 provisions for the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the workhouse inmates". The Guardians were free to select their own architects and plans, although the Commissioners in their Annual Report of the following year did mention that the o f f i c i a l "plans have been found to be ef f e c t i v e and have been very generally adopted," and were superior in "cheapness and completeness of 39 arrangements." The new-act directed parishes to combine and form unions governed by Boards of Guardians and elected by the ratepayers. The Guardians raised the money for the workhouse while the 16 Commissioners only had the power to compel them to spend up to a li m i t of £50 or one-tenth of the average Poor Rate for 40 the past three years on new buildings. The Commissioners, therefore, were forced to rely on persuasion to get b u i l t the kind of i n s t i t u t i o n s they favoured. The plans submitted by Kempthorne, the Commissioners' architect,; are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the "total i n s t i t u t i o n " 41 concept described by Goffman in Asy1 urns. The pauper surrendered his identity on entry in the searching room, was then c l a s s i f i e d , and sent to the appropriate receiving area to be cleansed and issued with the workhouse uniform, and from there, to the adjacent workroom. Men and women were further sub-divided into areas for the f i r s t class - those unable to work and second class - the able-bodied. Walls separated the yards in the hexagon plan and the radial arms of the building did so in the square plan. As with Head's design, a l l visual contact with the outside world was excluded, in this case by the continuous perimeter service building. The Commissioners and Guardians appeared to regard pauperism in the same lig h t as a contagious disease and, therefore, believed that paupers should be isolated from the industrious population in order that the industrious should not be contaminated by the idle and vicious. The Commissioners expressed this sentiment in their F i r s t Annual Report when they rejected the idea of employing paupers outside the workhouse, since such contact would f a m i l i a r i z e the industrious labourer with "pauper feelings and h a b i t s . " 4 2 17 Conditions in Kempthorne's buildings were crowded, and as Anna Dickens points out, the architect allowed more than twice the number of beds in a room than would be allowed 43 under "present day standards". However, i t must be re-membered that overcrowded houses were a contemporary problem, and Lord Ashley.used as evidence for his Common Lodging House B i l l in 1851 an account by a c i t y missionary who reported "27 male and female adults, 31 children,and two or three dogs, making 58 human beings breathing the contaminated atmosphere of a close room" which was 18ft by 10ft. This was not an isolated case, but 44 one of 270 such rooms in the missionary's d i s t r i c t . Kempthorne's plan was by no means perfect and Dickens draws attention to the unfortunate s i t i n g of the g i r l s ' bedroom next to the lying-in ward on one plan and next to the boys' on 45 another. Moreover, i t was probably not by chance that the refractory c e l l s , which were used for s o l i t a r y confinement, were situated next to the dead house and that the two dead houses flanked the rear e x i t . How many unfortunate paupers were convinced that this was the only exit they would ever use? It is d i f f i c u l t to know whether f i n a n c i a l r e s t r a i n t , Benthamite ideology or speed made necessary by the pressure of work took precedence and governed Kempthorne's designs. But there is l i t t l e ambiguity in the case of George Gilbert Scott, who was possibly the only architect of note to design workhouses, and who came to be "widely regarded as the most successful architect 46 of the nineteenth century". He also appears to be the only one who has l e f t a record of his experiences in carrying out 18 this work, and in his autobiography, he is disarmingly frank about the shortcomings of his early work and his motives and methods of obtaining workhouse commissions. In 1834 he was twenty three and a young, aspiring architect, when Sampson Kempthorne offered him work as an assistant in designing union workhouses. Scott stayed with Kempthorne only two months when his father died, and he decided to set up in 47 practice for himself. Moreover, his family was not wealthy, and he needed an income. He, therefore, wrote to every i n f l u e n t i a l friend of his father begging th e i r patronage, and applied to become the architect to the Union Workhouses in the d i s t r i c t where his father was known. Both steps met with success. Scott then invited a former fellow student, William B. Moffatt, to assist him in this work, and they later became partners. He describes Moffatt in dynamic terms: an aggressive,self-confident, industrious young man as opposed to the quieter,more r e t i r i n g Scott. They both spent th e i r time "union hunting" and Scott extolled his friend Moffatt's exertions as "almost superhuman". "Union hunting" was a very arduous and exciting business and Scott thoroughly enjoyed i t ; with Moffatt, he produced over f i f t y workhouses in ;the ten years from 1835. However, Scott complained that Kempthorne's plans were so economically priced that there was l i t t l e an architect could do to r a d i c a l l y improve the plan, for the work would be lost i f the estimate offered greatly exceeded what the Commissioners had led the Guardians to expect. 19 "Architecture and good f i n i s h or even any great improvements in arrangements, were at the time hopeless and one was driven to the wretched necessity of viewing one's profession as represented by one's chief works, merely as a means of getting a l i v i n g , . . . " Competition was the means by which improvements were effected: "Variety became necessary, or where was the ground-work for competition? Thus improved arrangements began to be aimed at. Perspective views were naturally regarded as attractive elements in a competition and to give them any interest there must be something to show, so that external appearance began timidly to be thought of, and estimates s t e a l t h i l y to creep upwards,..." 50 Competitions gave young and unknown architects like Scott and Moffatt the opportunity to advertize their talents and aesthetic taste. A bleak " b a s t i l l e - l i k e " design would not enhance their reputation and they would naturally attempt to induce the Guardians to give greater p r i o r i t y to the exterior design. According to Scott, the competition system was "open in every sense" with the competitor being "at l i b e r t y to take any step he thought good" and he describes how he and Moffatt worked the system: "On the day on which the designs were to be examined the competitors were usually waiting in the ante-room, and were called in one by one to give personal explanations, and the decision was often announced then and there to the assembled candidates. Moffatt was most successful in this kind of f i g h t i n g , having an i n s t i n c t i v e perception of which men to aim at pleasing and of how to meet their views and to address himself successfully to th e i r p a r t i c u l a r temperaments. The pains he took in improving the arrangements were enormous, communicating constantly with the most experienced governors of the workhouses, and gathering ideas wherever he went. He was always on the move. We went every week to Peele's coffee 20 house to see the country papers, and to find advertise-ments of pending competitions. Moffatt then ran down to the place to get up information. On his return, we set to work, with violence, to make the design, and to prepare the competition drawings, often working a l l night as well as a l l day. He would then start off by the mail, travel a l l night, meet the Board of Guardians, and perhaps win the competition, and return during the next night to set to work on another design." 51 It is clear that the architect's powers of persuasion and the individual idiosyncrasies of the Guardians had a profound effect on the choice of design. The Dunmow Workhouse of patterned brickwork (fig.10) and the Amersham Poor Law Institution (fig.11) of f l i n t and brick, which was a favorite medium for Scott, demonstrate the- increased interest in the attractiveness of the exterior and provide examples of cases where aesthetic values came into c o n f l i c t with u t i l i t y . In his autobiography Scott does not appear to hold an ideologue's position; his architectural conversion (by Pugin) to the gothic style came after he had given up workhouse com-missions. It would seem that he simply wished to succeed as an architect, designing aesthetically pleasing buildings. Yet in the Explanatory Remarks on a design for a workhouse for the Newton Abbot Union by Scott and W.B. Moffatt they c i t e as t h e i r general objectives: "In the arrangements of the Building the s t r i c t e s t regard has been paid to the most f u l l and perfect c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the Paupers and ;to affording to the Master and Mistress every f a c i l i t y for the most effectual supervision while on the other hand i t has been made an object to avoid giving a Prisonlike appearance to the Building, and to placing unnecessary r e s t r i c t i o n s on those classes (as the 21 sick and infirm) to whom the Establishment would be less a place of restraint than an Asylum rendered necessary by misfortune." It is not known whether Scott or Moffatt wrote the document but in a l l probability these were the terms of reference which they received from the Guardians and the Assistant Commissioner responsible for Newton Abbot and we cannot be sure whether or to what extent they reflected Scott's personal views. However, Scott and Moffatt paid serious attention to the need for "perfect c l a s s i f i c a t i o n " . They included separate lying in wards "that respectable women may be distinguished from those of bad character", and separated males and females in the chapel by a par t i t i o n six feet high. As each class was e f f e c t i v e l y separated throughout the day and night, the architects preferred not to use the chapel as a general dining room, but rather to follow the practice of the principal workhouses in London and use the separate Day Rooms as Dining Rooms since: "It w i l l be seen;from the Commissioners' regulations that out of four hours rest allowed to the Able bodied paupers during the day, three are occupied by t h e i r meals, and thus after a l l the shew of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and separation, the Able bodied of Both Sexes would spend three fourths ;of their unemployed time together." 52 An additional reason was that to combine the use of dining room and chapel made necessary a chapel of disproportionate s i z e . Scott was also i n f l u e n t i a l in removing the infectious wards from workhouse buildings and at Newton Abbot he recommended "that the infectious wards be b u i l t in an ent i r e l y detached 53 s i t u a t i o n " . The separate infirmary adopted by Scott was copied by other architects and in 1867 the Metropolitan Poor Act stated that the sick were to be housed in separate pauper 22 hospitals on sites away from the workhouse. A s i g n i f i c a n t factor which improved the design of work-houses was the influence of local magnates. In many cases the i r overriding concern was not based on questions of economy, function, or the principl e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " , but was a conscious wish for beauty: they did not wish to live in the neighbourhood of a prison-like i n s t i t u t i o n . Their solution was to build in the same manner as the surrounding country houses and in the Second Annual Poor Law Report an Assistant Commissioner describes such an example: "I generally found the House of Industry a substantially b u i l t and sometimes a handsome structure. The Stow Hundred house had so p a l a t i a l a character, that I was tempted to inquire whether any peculiar concurrence of circumstances had occasioned the erection of an e d i f i c e , the appearance of which seemed to me so l i t t l e in unison with the wants of the houseless and necessitous poor... My inquiry soon e l i c i t e d information that the character of the structure had been usually attributed to the circumstance that i t was situated in the immediate v i c i n i t y of the country seats of some of the directors, who were naturally inclined to adorn rather than to disfigure the landscape. The future subject of chagrin had not been anticipated; the Hundred-house eclipsed some of the neighbouring mansions." 55 The s i t i n g of the Dunmow Union workhouse caused considerable local controversy because John Barnard, the Vice Chairman of the Dunmow Board of Guardians, had bought the land opposite the proposed workhouse for £ 1 0 , 0 0 0 . He objected to the proposed site on the grounds that i t was unhealthy and because of the injury the building in that situation would do to his property, his house being a quarter of a mile from the f i e l d . The building would be d i r e c t l y opposite his house, obstruct his view and he claimed that the inmates would 23 be.walking about his grounds and be a nuisance to him. He collected nine letters from medical men who supported his opinion that the f i e l d was unhealthy, but an independent arbiter, Dr. Southwood Smith, overrode these objections and pronounced the site healthy and suitable for construction. Nevertheless, Smith whose dedication to the principle of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " was equalled only by Chadwick's, was prepared to compromise his ideals and recommend that as the building might "interfere with a favorite prospect, i t is but right that as f a r as regards the form of the building, etc. i t 56 should not be rendered an unsightly object... " Scott obliged accordingly with an a t t r a c t i v e Tudor style entrance.(fig.10) The influence of local magnates was considerable and W.J. Donthorn designed nine workhouses, although he held no o f f i c i a l post in the counties involved. Donthorn was primarily a country house architect and his patrons turned to him when they assumed their duties as Guardians under the 1834 Act. He had designed Hillington in 1822 for Sir WilliamB. Folkes, who became Chairman of the Gayton Union, andWat1ington in 1830 for C.B. Plestow, at Downham. Unlike the competitive business atmosphere described by Scott, Donthorn operated in an atmosphere of patronage. He composed prayers for the inmates of Downham, and sold the site which he owned, and produced the design for 57 the Swaffham workhouse. His plans were u t i l i t a r i a n , but his elevations were impressive and reflected his country house specialty. Individual observers make different comparisons: 24 Anne Digby in Pauper Palaces points out that "Aylsham Workhouse is reminiscent of nearby B l i c k l i n g H a l l " (fig.12) b u i l t in the seventeenth century, whereas Roderick O'Donnell compares i t to Donthorn's own work at H i g h c l i f f e Castle. Large transomed windows running through a number of storeys 59 were ch a r a c t e r i s t i c of Donthorn and also appear on the central block of the workhouse at Ely. ( f i g . 13) However, here the castellated roof line and simulated towers r e f l e c t the c i t y ' s cathedral, ( f i g . 14). Comparisons may vary but these impressive building designs follow the pauper palace 6 0 t r a d i t i o n begun in East Anglia during the previous century. The individual stamp of an architect is hard to suppress and similar comparisons can be made between Scott's workhouses and his country house designs. There is a relationship between the Windsor Poor Law Institution and Kelham Hall , despite the fact that Scott designed the l a t t e r in a heavily gothic style, ( f i g s . 15 and 16) and Anna Dickens compares i t with Losely Park in Surrey, b u i l t 1562-68. She also makes the point that Scott's new workhouses were "with the exception of the ward blocks, domestic in scale and non-institutional in f e e l i n g " , which perhaps r e f l e c t s his personal bias. Not only were the exteriors of these new workhouses designed to^be in harmony with local landmarks, but they were also constructed using materials t r a d i t i o n a l l y employed in the various regions. At Rye when Foden, the architect, asked the 25 Guardians how they would like the brickwork faced, they decided on stucco using the local chalk lime, (fig.17) which 6 9 is a common exterior f i n i s h in the area, while at Battle, the relationship between Battle Abbey and Battle Workhouse is p r i n c i p a l l y due to the s i m i l a r i t y of material used. (fig.18) Less affluent unions could not afford such attention to landscape, architectural t r a d i t i o n or taste. There the pressures of economic restraint decided whatl.type of building would be erected. The Rye Union experienced some problems in raising the money for a new workhouse and Assistant Commissioner Parker suggested altering the existing Rye workhouse to accom-modate the old and infirm while altering Brede workhouse to house the remaining paupers. This expedient was unworkable, as ft 3 both were f u l l and more space was required. Therefore, a f t e r . some consideration, the Commissioners sanctioned the borrowing for a new workhouse and a two storey building was erected, 64 designed by Mr. Foden for half the usual architect's fee. The Guardians also appeared to have paid close attention to the building costs in the case of the Caxton workhouse and insisted that the architect, W.T. Nash, j u s t i f y every feature of his proposal which might be considered architectural rather than 65 s t r i c t l y u t i l i t a r i a n . Such examples support the contention that Kempthorne was required to be rigorously cost conscious. Although f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was considered of paramount importance, the p r i n c i p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " , which Head declared should extend to the fabric of the building, was 26 not always put into practice. Head estimated the cost of his design to be £4,300. whereas the f i r s t workhouse b u i l t for f i v e hundred paupers at Abingdon,and designed by Sampson Kempthorne, the Commissioners' recommended architect, cost £8,500. Such an outlay would imply that the quality of the structure was far superior to that specified by Head. Scott, who had c r i t i c i z e d the "meanness" of Kempthorne's sp e c i f i c a t i o n added to his own Explanatory Remarks that, "though economy would be to a certain extent be kept in view i t would in no case be allowed to inter-fere with the strength and d u r a b i l i t y of the Building and nothing but the very best materials of th e i r several kinds would be admitted." 6 7 W.J. Donthorn, also specified that the "best quality" bricks and gravel and "good sound Ba l t i c timber and English oak" be used in the construction of Ely Union Workhouse6^ and by 1868, this type of quality construction was recommended by the Poor Law Board in a c i r c u l a r l e t t e r to the Boards of 69 Guard i ans. 27 Chapter 3  Civic Pride vs. Ideology The Boards of Guardians exerted considerable influence over the type of workhouse that was b u i l t and they were un-doubtedly moved by c i v i c pride and the prestige that they incurred by building an impressive public i n s t i t u t i o n . From among the elaborate union workhouses that were constructed we w i l l examine the City of London Union Workhouse (fig.19),the Kensington Union Workhouse, (fig.21) and the Birmingham New Workhouse (fig.22). The engravings of these workhouses depict substantial buildings which in the case of the London workhouses are r i c h l y ornamented, denying the fact that they are pauper i n s t i t u t i o n s . There is an obvious contrast between these buildings and, for example, the Abingdon Workhouse (fig.24) which was so stark and earned Kempthorne such derision. However, despite the imposing facades, there are s t i l l features of the design which could be seen as deliberate attempts to control the behaviour of the inmates. The>:City of London Workhouse in the Italian Romanesque style is surrounded by a wall, which appears at least six feet high, (even allowing for the unreliable perspective), together with imposing entrance gates. While this would create an impression of order and substance in a private house, i t was undoubtedly intimidating to any approaching pauper. Similarly the facade of the Kensington Union Workhouse is car e f u l l y 28 detailed, and ornate, and here open r a i l i n g s replace the so l i d wall of the City of London establishment, but i t is nevertheless a high fence with spikes, e f f e c t i v e l y c o n t r o l l i n g access. "Those gates and locks, and a l l those signs of power; I t i i s a prison with a milder name," 70 Clock towers are a feature of the design of a l l three workhouses, and the City of London Workhouse boasts two. Again, i t is possible to consider them in di f f e r e n t ways. They were costly architectural additions, found in 1arge ;country houses and in such substantial c i v i c structures as town h a l l s , intended to add prestige and dignity to the building. In a workhouse, however, there was the unpleasant connotation of the d i s c i p l i n e of time-keeping: 71 "That large loud clock which t o l l s each dreaded hour." However, they could also serve a useful function, providing a modern convenience to the building. The central tower at the City of London Workhouse may well have been b u i l t to accommodate a water tank, i f piped water was provided, since a steam engine was situated inithe immediate area.(fig.20) The architect of both the City of London and Kensington Workhouses set aside the more open and ornate side of the b u i l d i at the front, overlooking the road, for the aged, the infirm and in the case of the City of London building, for children under age seven. These are the categories of the deserving poor for whom there was some sympathy, whereas the Guardians emphasized 29 the d i s c i p l i n a r y nature of the i n s t i t u t i o n toward the able-bodied and younger classes by keeping them "more immediately 72 under the eye of the master and matron." We can see that there was a d e f i n i t e s i m i l a r i t y in the architectural styles of both workhouses and country houses: there is a prevalence of both the r u r a l - I t a l i a n and Tudor styles, and in later buildings we see the gothic influence. The Tudor style was f e l t to be truly English; i t evoked the image of generous h o s p i t a l i t y on the part of the country gentleman, whereas the gothic style was associated with C h r i s t i a n i t y and truthfulness 73 following the writings of, most notably, Pugin and Ruskin. These sentiments coincide with a workhouse as refuge for the old and sick, and as a morally u p l i f t i n g environment for the able-bodied. If this was the sole c r i t e r i a of the Guardians, there would be l i t t l e else to say, but th e i r dilemma was that they were divided in th e i r desire to provide a haven for the deserving, while at the same time furnishing l i v i n g space that would act as a deterrent to the i d l e , able-bodied pauper. It was this c o n f l i c t that was expressed in the elegant exterior facades and austere i n t e r i o r plans. The architects of these metropolitan workhouses were no longer using the hexagon and radial plans produced by Kempthorne. Instead, they followed much more complex designs, while re-taining certain Poor Law p r i n c i p l e s . There was a s t r i c t system of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , with each group including the unruly, given the i r own airing ground. In the City of London plan, (fig.20) 30 the architect made provision for five married couples' rooms, although this was a very small proportion of the twelve hundred residents. These rooms were also obviously intended for the aged, since they were positioned at the front of the building next to the accommodation for the infirm. The idea of central inspection was no longer apparent, but the rooms for the assistant master and matron overlooked the section for the unruly. A dining hall of impressive dimensions 100 feet long and more than 50 feet wide, with an open timber roof was b u i l t to accommodate 1200 persons and the i l l u s t r a t i o n of a similar dining hall (fig,25) translates these measurements into three dimensions. Romanesque arches provide a decorative element to the end wall, echoed in the clerestory windows. The light fixtures are not plain but of ornamental wrought iron, denying the p r i n c i p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " , yet the atmosphere is s t i l l b1eak. In these London structures size made rational planning necessary and this rational planning took princ i p l e into account. On the other hand, architects and authorities were mindful that such imposing structures would form part of the urban landscape in the capital c i t y . Civic pride expressed i t s e l f in philanthropy, and philanthropy helped to build i n s t i t u t i o n s including workhouses and influenced their design and f a c i l i t i e s . The Birmingham New Workhouse was the object of considerable local philanthropy, undoubtedly increasing the donor's prestige. The principal feature was the separate chapel in gothic style, complete with central tower, 31 and " f i t t e d up with open seats and two small g a l l e r i e s in 74 the transepts for children." The Guardians, Officers of the workhouse and the Contractors donated three stained glass windows for the chancel and a i s l e s . The contractor presented two other one-light windows and Mr. Minton and the architect gave encaustic t i l e s for the chancel, a i s l e s and nave. It i s , perhaps, rather cynical to add at this point that the contract price for the construction was £29,000 exclusive of fixt u r e s , furniture and f i t t i n g s : certainly i t was a handsome contract to win in 1852. Nonetheless, these donations represented a concern for the moral welfare of the poor. 32 Chapter 4  Inside vs. Outside The Guardians reconciled their c i v i c pride and ideology through the contrast between inside and outside: between the internal planning and f i n i s h and the external appearance. In this way they could take pride in constructing a building which not only enhanced the environment but was also a model for how deterrence and social control might be embodied in the archi-tectural layout. The Birmingham Workhouse may have presented an attractive facade and The Builder praised the local architect J.J. Bateman for providing the town with a "very creditable structure", obviously something the town could be proud of, something which by extension would enhance the reputation of the Guardians and a l l those responsible for i t s construction. But the magazine also made a point of expressing i t s approval of their p r i o r i t i e s "the principal features of the design are the i solation of each from the other, of the workhouse, the infirmary, the tramp department, and the asylum for the children, and of the perfect separation of the classes in each department."" (underlining by AS) 75 These are the same p r i o r i t i e s which the Architectural Magazine approved of in Kempthorne's plans in 1835: "these plans appear to us, from a cursory inspection, excellently arranged; and i t is most gr a t i f y i n g to see the attention that has been paid by .the architect to the principles of separation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , to cleanliness, to v e n t i l a t i o n , and to general conveniences... the wards and a l l parts of the building that require warming are heated by hot water pipes or steam. There are baths, infirmaries, 33 nurseries for children, schools, and in short, everything that can be required for health, and for keeping those inmates who are able to work, constantly employed." 76 There was, therefore, a continuation of the basic values which had been expressed over the years. The b e l i e f in the necessity of inspection also remained: "the Main building, comprising the workhouse department, has an open corridor throughout, 10 feet wide, and open from the second f l o o r to the roof, with iron g a l l e r i e s at each f l o o r , for supervision by the o f f i c e r s only. This arrangement gives great f a c i l i t y for ef f e c t i v e v e n t i l a t i o n , and inspection." 77 However, such an arrangement is also reminiscent of the i n t e r i o r of a prison, and the inspection g a l l e r i e s of the Panopticon, and contrasts dramatically with the gothic style and medieval grouping of the buildings which in the past expressed Christian charity, not the threat of punishment. A contemporary writer, J.M. Granville, described this c o n f l i c t between i n t e r i o r and exterior in another i n s t i t u t i o n : Colney Hatch Lunatic Asylum, which opened in 1851, a year e a r l i e r than Birmingham Workhouse. It also provided accommodation for a large number: one thousand patients, as opposed to sixteen hundred paupers. "Its facade, of nearly a third of a mile, is broken at intervals by Italian campaniles and cupolas and the whole aspect of the exterior leads the v i s i t o r to expect an i n t e r i o r of commensurate pretensions. He no sooner crosses the threshold, however, than the scene changes. As he passes along the corridor, which runs from end to end of the building, he is oppressed with the gloom;... The staircases scarcely equal those of a workhouse; plaster there is none, and a coat of paint or whitewash does not even conceal the rugged surface of the brickwork. In the wards, a similar state of a f f a i r s exists: airy and spacious they are without a doubt, but of human interest they possess nothing." 78 34 The use of whitewash on bare brickwork presents a stark contrast to the ornateness of the exteriors of these buildings, and its use was un i versa 1: "In new country workhouses the walls of these sick rooms are commonly of stone - not plastered, but constantly whitewashed - and the f l o o r not seldom of stone also." 79 Such a u t i l i t a r i a n i n t e r i o r reconciles the idea of c i v i c pride, and f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y in public spending. The taxpayer can enjoy with pride the sight of a d i g n i f i e d and impressive public i n s t i t u t i o n knowing that p r i o r i t y has been given to the facade rather than to luxurious i n t e r i o r appointments for the less deserving. Also, whitewash provided instant cleanliness, and d i r t , according to the Victorians, was e s s e n t i a l l y disorder and disorder must not be tolerated. "In chasing d i r t , cleaning and washing we are p o s i t i v e l y re-ordering our environment, making i t conform to an idea, separating, tidying and ultimately purifying." 80 This sounds remarkably close to Bentham's idea of reform through the beneficial effect of the environment. It also reinforced the idea that different values were at work on the inside and the outside of the building; the exterior being style and the i n t e r i o r , s t e r i l i t y . Although the i n t e r i o r walls may have appeared cold and bare, i t should, in fairness, be added that, through their architects, ithe Guardians paid considerab1e^attention to providing these i n s t i t u t i o n s with the latest in contemporary conveniences, as the description of the Birmingham workhouse i l l u s t r a t e s : 35 "From a high-pressure steam boiler, placed in a central situation, hot supplies for baths, lavatories, hospitals, wash-houses, drying house, kitchen,sculleries, and for warming the infirm wards, dining h a l l , and other parts of the building are obtained... Every room w i l l be lighted by gas." 81 There was also considerable interest paid to obtaining optimum ven t i l a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y in rooms intended for the use of the sick and the Commissioners published a l e t t e r by Sampson Kempthorne in 1835 recommending. a particular system by Dr. 82 Arnott for Warming and Ventilating. The advantages of the warming apparatus were i t s exceeding cheapness and simplicity of construction (which increased i t s r e l i a b i l i t y ) , and although Kempthorne had not seen the ventilation system in operation, he was convinced of i t s commendabi1ity. Central heating, hot water and gas lig h t i n g were not found in many luxurious private houses and certainly not in the homes of the poor and the Guardians could be j u s t i f i a b l y proud of the modern technology that they had u t i l i z e d in the building's construction. It is also evident that we have diverged a long way from Head's plan with i t s very basic amenities and i t s sole emphasis on "less e l i g i b i l i t y " . However, the design of buildings intended for the poor, whether i n s t i t u t i o n s or housing, reflected the Victorian attitude to poverty. Samuel Tuke pioneered a new enlightened treatment for the insane which was based on specially designed i n s t i t u t i o n s . Yet, in th e i r description of the Pauper Lunatic Asylum in Wakefield, both he and the architects, Watson and Pritchett f e l t compelled to make special reference to the fact that this 36 was an i n s t i t u t i o n designed s p e c i f i c a l l y for paupers, c l e a r l y believing that the inmates should not be indulged with beauty in the design of the i r habitation. "the magistrates displayed the most enlightened l i b e r a l i t y and prudential economy; the former by acceeding to every thing that was suggested as l i k e l y to contribute to the comfort andi.cure of the patients, and the la t t e r by forbidding go everything that appeared like unnecessary ornament." and "No attempt has been made in these elevations, at architectural display. Neither the magistrates nor the architects forgot that the building was a Pauper (in i t a l i c s ) Lunatic Asylum. In the elevations, their sole endeavour was to preserve s i m p l i c i t y , and to obtain as much general effect as possible, without s a c r i f i c i n g internal comfort and convenience, or unnecessarily expending the public money." 84 Theoretically, the tension between the Victorian desire to make buildings suitable to the environment and complementary to the taste of the sponsors, yet deterrent to malingerers, could be solved by allowing fa^adeand i n t e r i o r to be in radical contrast or c o n f l i c t . On the other hand, the exterior of every building is a symbol and the symbol most obviously appropriate for a building to house indigent working people was sim p l i c i t y , i f not stern warning. We can appreciate the Victorian attitude to poverty because i t extends to the present day, and according to Robert Sommer, who discusses prison and public architecture, is based on the premise that i f you provide good architecture for public tenants they w i l l not appreciate i t and i f you give mental patients 85 anything attractive they w i l l not take care of i t . While Tuke is conscious of "unnecessarily expending the public money" 37 Sommer writes in the twentieth century that the taxpayer does not want to believe that people l i v i n g in public housing 8 6 are better off than he i s . It is a modern version of the principl e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " . Workhouses were monumental and symbolic whereas worker housing was not monumental, although i t was symbolic. In housing for the poor, "sim p l i c i t y " is the symbol which allowed the reformer to improve but not, at the same time, "indulge" the poor. The simple, often stark, clean lines of the new housing blocks intended for the poor represented the attempt to clear away the disorder of overcrowding and replace i t with order, d i s c i p l i n e , and moral improvement. Housing was recog-nized as a social issue during the second quarter-of the nineteenth century. Philanthropic bodies attempted to a l l e v i a t e the problem but they made small impression on the chronic lack of affordable housing. Their effo r t s were directed toward providing improved housing for artisans who had a regular source of income, and the problem of securing decent housing for the strata of indigent poor remained unsolved. The Victorian attitude to poverty was reflected in the style of architecture that emerged, and these housing units shared several elements in common with the workhouse. The housing blocks that Henry Darbishire designed for the Peabody Trust and Angela Burdett-Coutts were grim and u t i 1 i t a r i a n , ( f i g 26 ) without any pretension to style or beauty, while the endless rows of new houses b u i l t in industrial towns were plain, drab and monotonous, ( f i g . 27) Yet, they were a vast improvement 38 over the squalid, overcrowded rooms which were the lot of the majority of the working class population. As with workhouses and other i n s t i t u t i o n a l planning, architects and builders paid special attention to the importance of sanitation and ventilation to prevent the spread of disease, keeping in mind the cholera outbreaks of 1832 and 1848. Internal courtyards were a common feature, designed to be used as safe playgrounds for the children but compared to the workhouse yards they appear no more cheerful, being generally devoid of vegetation, benches or even a modest swing. The Peabody Buildings were also r a i l e d off from the surrounding streets with gates that were locked at night. This separation was deliberate and set the occupants of these buildings apart, and somewhat above the surrounding community, away from "contamination" by the lower classes. There were also a number of regulations which the tenants were obliged to follow, which gave the housing societies a measure of control over their tenants, even i f i t was of a benevolent nature. Inside these buildings "finishes were spartan; a l l the walls were l e f t unplastered to minimize the risk of vermin and wallpaper was forbidden." 87 Again, this r e f l e c t s an attitude to the poor; housing must be designed to protect the poor from themselves in the belief that they are naturally d i r t y , and cannot or do not deserve to appreciate beauty. 39 However, the attitude toward designing housing for the poor differed from designing workhouse accommodation for paupers. We have seen that there was often a c o n f l i c t in workhouse design between an elegant exterior and a spartan i n t e r i o r . In housing, the exterior and i n t e r i o r were in harmony: the sim p l i c i t y of both facade and i n t e r i o r was intended to promote the same benefits of health, moral well-being and contentment with one's l o t . Yet these new housing blocks aroused mixed reactions and were labelled "barracky and b a s t i l l e l i k e " with rather more j u s t i f i c a t i o n in some instances than the workhouse. But the phi1anphropic nature of these buildings doubtless prevented too virulent an attack by c r i t i c s on the i r construction. Attitudes toward building for the poor changed l i t t l e over the years: the f i r s t Peabody building was not b u i l t u n t i l 1864, t h i r t y years after the Poor Law Amendment Act, and this slow evolution of ideas concerned with housing the poor was equally apparent in workhouses. 40 Chapter 5  Continuity or Change 1834 is often treated as a watershed: harsh attitudes, less e l i g i b i l i t y , the terror of the well regulated workhouse, stress on i n s t i t u t i o n a l treatment and inspection, obsession with c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and separation, belief in architecture as an instrument of reform, concern about "contagion" and the dangers of density. These factors cannot be denied, yet 1834 does not represent a complete departure from a l l previous practice: the rules of management compiled by the Commissioners are evident in many of the e a r l i e r workhouses and demonstrate a continuity that has often been overlooked. There were " b a s t i l l e s " before 1834 and "pauper palaces" afterward; there was d i v e r s i t y in form and purpose before and s t i l l some div e r s i t y afterward. There was a marked s i m i l a r i t y in the values expressed by Sir Frederic Eden who surveyed the country's workhouses in the late eighteenth century and those of the Commissioners of 1834. One feature of the old workhouses, largely absent in the new, was the be l i e f that the poor could work profitably to make the workhouse self s u f f i c i e n t , and this is evident in the plans of e a r l i e r workhouses where the p r i o r i t y given to space allocated to workrooms was considerable. A number of schemes were devised over the years whereby the poor were to be engaged in some form of manufacturing, with the benefit accruing to the parish. However, none of these plans was 41 successful because i t was found that when trade was good, an average workman could find emp1oyment,and when i t was bad, 88 there was no market anyway for the goods that he produced. Nevertheless, the buildings continued to be designed to accom-modate workrooms. Sir Frederic Eden in his report on The State of the Poor published in 1797, described the B r i s t o l workhouse, b u i l t in 1696, which i l l u s t r a t e s this type of arrangement, and Assistant Poor Law Commissioner Captain Chapman brought this information up to date in 1832. Chapman wrote that i t was intended "that a spacious workhouse be erected at a general charge, large enough for the poor to be employed therein, and also for room for such as being unable to work, are to be relieved by charity." 89 The inmates o r i g i n a l l y were one hundred g i r l s who were taught to spin worsted yarn purchased through an arrangement with a manufacturer. But i t was soon found that the wage rates for coarse work were too low to pay for the support of the g i r l s , and the Corporation purchased new equipment to enable them to do fine work. When this became profitable the workhouse accepted one hundred boys and subsequently the "ancient people of the c i t y " , whom they put to "such employment as were f i t 90 for their ages and strengths. Although this was successful for a while, Eden i d e n t i f i e s the problem, which was the usual downfall of such schemes: "As soon as the Poor came to do anything tolerably well, they went off to sea, or were apprenticed in the c i t y , and they made nothing perfect or merchantable from th e i r work, but only spoiled the materials, so that instead of lessening the charge of maintaining the Poor they only increased i t . " 91 42 The inmates of B r i s t o l Workhouse were s t i l l employed when Assistant Commissioner Captain Chapman made his report in 1832. Infirm men were making laces and p l a i t i n g straw and women were knitting and winding worsted, but workshops for the purpose were hired in the town, while the able bodied were employed outside the house as stone breakers. Eden also described the extensive f a c i l i t i e s offered by the House of Industry b u i l t at Newport, Isle of Wight, almost a century after B r i s t o l . It was capable of accommodating seven hundred people and boasted workshops "for the manufacturers and mechanics", "a master weaver's room and spinning room, 96 f t . by 18, with storerooms over i t ; . . . shoemaker's and t a i l e r s ' shops, with a spinning room, 150ft by 18, with weaving rooms and store-92 rooms over". These workshops produced a profitable return on the work undertaken. However, i t is not known whether p r o f i t a b i l i t y was consistent through the years or whether i t f e l l victim to the same problems recorded at B r i s t o l . The p r i o r i t y given to workshop space was s t i l l apparent in the new workhouse b u i l t in the Parish of Boldre, Near Lymington in 1793. Here the plan was very simple: the ground floo r was divided into a workroom on the right of the entrance, and a kitchen and back kitchen on the l e f t . The Master's Room, which doubled as a Committee Room was in the centre and had "a window on one side, inspecting the workroom; and another 93 on the opposite side inspecting the kitchen". Here is an example of the architecture being used expressly to carry out the p r i n c i p l e of inspection. Upstairs the sleeping chambers 43 were separated as below, but as there were generally more women than men resident in the house, a sick room with a separate staircase was divided off from the men's room. Concern for the inhabitants' well-being and the contemporary obsession with ventilation as a means of preserving health were also expressed in the description of the si t e as "elevated, dry and airy", and "b u i l t of brick, single, that the air may 94 have free passage through i t . " This was a small workhouse which accommodated only nine or ten men and women and between twenty and t h i r t y children in May 1793, and we see from the plan that there was no provision for the separation of the sexes or the dif f e r e n t classes of poor during the day. Neither were there separate courtyards walled off from each other, but instead: "the ground between the house and the road, which is a f a l l i n g space of about sixty yards is divided, f i r s t into a dry convenient play yard for the children; and the remainder, about half an acre, running down to the road is a garden. The larger garden, which is about an acre, l i e s behind the house."95 Workhouses were expected to be self s u f f i c i e n t in garden produce and the garden mentioned was probably used to supply vegetables for the inmates. The solution to the alarming increase in the Poor Rates was sti11 believed by some to be a s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t workhouse. The author of an account of workhouses f i r s t published in 1732 and reprinted in 1786 believed that workhouses 44 "under a prudent and good management w i l l answer a l l the ends of Charity to the Poor, in regard to the i r Souls and Bodies; and yet at the same time prove effectual Expedients for encreasing our manufactures, as well as removing a heavy burden from the Nation." 96 His position conveniently salved his Christian conscience because "idleness and sloth are Immoralities" while at the same time promising to ease his taxes. This be l i e f that the workhouse could be a profitable establishment was abandoned before 1834 and, consequently, the p r i o r i t y given to workshops in the workhouses we have discussed was not repeated lat e r . We see that these early workhouses differed considerably in their size and the complexity of their f a c i l i t i e s , and while Union workhouses also varied in size, they were generally larger because incorporation into unions meant that each i n s t i t u t i o n served a wider area. In a small establishment li k e Boldre, separation into classes as well as sex would have been unworkable; yet, in common with 1834 workhouses, the pr i n c i p l e of inspection and the belief in a healthy environment through the benefits of ventilation were implemented. There was, therefore both continuity with the past and change at work. The b e l i e f in the importance of work was expressed in the concern for training children. If they could be " r e l i g i o u s l y and c a r e f u l l y educated and be taught and accustomed to work 9 7 and labour" they could be prevented from growing up to perpetuate the cycle of pauperism, and, therefore, reduce the 45 burden of the Poor Rate. This principle was enacted in the plan and organization of the workhouse in Bishopsgate Street, London. The house was divided into two parts: the Steward's side and the Keeper's side. Poor children were taken into the Steward's side and were employed spinning wool or flax or else sewing or knitting and were taught to read, write and "cast accompts". To prevent any contamination of the children by the disreputable poor, these inmates were housed separately in the keeper's side. "Vagabonds, Beggars, P i l f e r e r s , lewd, idle and disorderly Persons committed by two of the Governors" were given "such r e l i e f as is proper for them, and are employed in beating Hemp for twine spinners, Hemp dressers, Linnen-weavers, .shoemakers, and other trades; and also wash linnen for the children on the Steward's side." 98 In order to accommodate these functions "the workhouse (exclusive of the Chapel and Prison Part) contains above 200 feet in length, has three rooms one over another, about 150 feet in length; the lowest of which is the .Work-Room for Boys, the second for G i r l s and the thi r d Room has two wards for lodging the boys. The g i r l s ward is over the Chapel which separates the workhouse from the Prison-side." 99 This arrangement not only stressed the importance of work, but the be l i e f in the danger of contagion by association which necessitated c l a s s i f y i n g and separating the deserving and un-deserving. The Bishopsgate Workhouse began operating in 1701 using these rules and i l l u s t r a t e s the continuity of perception and practice. 46 While workrooms were of prime importance in a number of workhouses, in towns lik e C a r l i s l e , l i t t l e work was done because "few that can;.work w i l l come in" 1 0 0 or as in East Grinstead, 101 the men refused outright to do any work. The belief in a profitable or even self s u f f i c i e n t i n s t i t u t i o n was abandoned before 1834, although work was required of the inmates to prevent idleness and was in some cases carried out on a commercial basis. Consequently the size and variety of workrooms began to disappear from the plans and in many cases such a space was called simply the dayroom. Complete separation of the sexes was considered preferable but frequently in eighteenth century workhouses there was no separation during the day. Often the workhouse was quite small, as the one described in Hamsted, Middlesex where "a large con-venient old house" was hired to accommodate "twenty in Family of which eight or nine are children". Here there is no mention of segregation and the use of the word "Family" suggests a communal atmosphere. Obviously, without the intense interest in the pa r t i c u l a r principles of separation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n that came in the nineteenth century, many buildings of diverse plan could be used as workhouses. Nevertheless, there is a s i m i l a r i t y between a large i n s t i t u t i o n l i k e the Newport House of Industry and the City of London Workhouse, where in both i n s t i t u t i o n s separate rooms were set aside for married men and wives. However, in such early workhouses as those in Br i s t o l 47 and Bishopsgate Street, there would appear to be a greater concern to separate the decent, and p a r t i c u l a r l y the children, from the morally degenerate in order to prevent contamination. Eden, through his c r i t i c i s m and descriptions of various workhouses, indicated the contemporary opinion of a well run workhouse and this included the necessity for res t r a i n t , segregation of sex e s , c l a s s i f i c a t i o n to prevent contamination and the need for i n s t i t u t i o n a l rules. He c r i t i c i z e d the Oxford workhouse because: "The boundary walls were i n s u f f i c i e n t to confine the paupers; the garden yard and of f i c e s lay open, and in common with each other; the windows and doors of the house without proper bars or fastenings; no regular wards appropriated to the sick, aged or infirm, nor nurseries for the children; the sexes strangely intermixed in their eating and s i t t i n g rooms and also in t h e i r shops and exercise grounds; nor any separation between the i r wards and sleeping rooms." 102 In addition, the Master's and Matron's apartments were in one corner of one of the wings "out of sight and hearing of every part of the house where their attention was more p a r t i c u l a r l y 103 demanded." As a result, alterations, improvements and repairs were made to the house to make i t what a House of Industry should be: "a comfortable asylum for the aged and infirm, a place of useful employment for those who are able to work and a House of Correction for the idle and pr o f l i g a t e . " 104 Ins t i t u t i o n a l rules were also not a new innovation of the union workhouse: Eden describes the f a c i l i t i e s at Shrewsbury where new inmates surrendered their own clothes and were washed. 48 "Adjoining the house are two ranges of buildings, one of which contains apartments to which the Poor are sent on their admission to be stripped and washed and infectious cases are dealt with t i l l cured." 105 It is not surprising, therefore, that Eden reports that there was generally a terror of the workhouse and that few able-bodied entered one unless forced by adverse circumstances to 106 do so. "The terror of a well-run workhouse" was not an invention of 1834. Nevertheless, a new harshness toward the poor did appear in the early nineteenth century. Perceiving an increase in pauperism, certain parishes attempted to reduce the numbers on r e l i e f and consequently the poor rate. Notable among them was the parish of Bingham, where the Rev. Robert Lowe was magistrate. He changed the system to refuse a l l r e l i e f in kind or money and sent every applicant and his family at once into the workhouse. In addition, "the applicant who entered the workhouse on the plea that he was starving for want of work was taken at his word, and told that these luxuries and 107 benefits could only be given by the parish against work...". He was then required to break a specified number of stones in the yard. Workhouse d i s c i p l i n e was intended to act as a deterrent and s t r i c t separation of man, wife and children was insisted upon, together with workhouse uniform, no beer, tobacco or snuff, regular hours and no communication with friends out of doors. 49 These were conditions that were later deplored as inhuman in the 1834 workhouses, although they demonstrate a continuity rather than a break with the past. The p r i n c i p l e of "less e l i g i b i l i t y " pervades the reports of the Poor Law Commissioners and they were extremely sensitive to the fact that they believed paupers were enjoying a more comfortable l i f e than the industrious poor. In the East Grinstead workhouse, Assistant Commissioner Majendie was indignant to find that "there is a show of some restraint by placing a porter at the front gate, which is locked; but as the back of the premises is open/to the f i e l d s , the men get out 108 when they please." They are, therefore, in no way cut off from friends and relations, and as they refused a l l work, they were very comfortable. Majendie pointed out a common abuse of the workhouse in Uckfield, where a glazier and his wife and f i v e children l i v e d . The man was sent out to work and his earnings of 12s per week were paid to the parish, but the cost of keeping the family exceeded £60 whereas out of the workhouse, an industrious labourer with a wife earning 2s and qualifying for allowances for his children would take home only £48.2s per year. Such a worker would, therefore, fare harder than the inmate of the workhouse. These, however, were Majendie 1s own calculations, and doubtless were cited to strengthen his argument. Perhaps the pre-1834 workhouse which came closest to the model design of Sampson Kempthorne and the recommendations of Sir Francis Bond Head and the Commissioners was the Thurgaton 50 Hundred Incorporated Workhouse which was completed in December 1824. The plans were by The Rev. John Thomas Becher, based on 109 the "Principle of C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Management" and con-110 forming to the system adopted at Southwell. They were, however, more sophisticated than the Southwell plans (fig.28) where, as we can see, there is a simple d i v i s i o n of the sexes, each having th e i r own day room, with individual staircases to the i r dormitories. The only a n c i l l a r y accommodation was the Governor's room and o f f i c e , the kitchen, pantry and school room. Certainly the most imposing feature of the building was the large oval governor's room which would undoubtedly intimidate those requesting r e l i e f . In addition, stout walls indicated the promise of restraint which the workhouse offered. It was architecture reinforcing a p r i n c i p l e . The Thurgaton Workhouse is much more complex than Southwell. From the plan, (fig.29) the entrance appears intimidating; high walls line the walk to the entrance porch and again the Committee Room is of imposing dimensions. This room was to be used occasionally as a chapel and could be combined with the school room by means of folding doors. A strong sense of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n allowed two day rooms for each sex, one for those of good character and one for the i d l e , immoral and improvident. In the right wing these were combined with the kitchen and back kitchen and in the l e f t wing with the governor's and secretary's rooms. P r i o r i t y was no longer given to workrooms and these were now called day rooms, even i f some menial employment was carried on 51 in these areas. Any conviction that the workhouse could be self s u f f i c i e n t has obviously been abandoned, despite the fact that the i n s t i t u t i o n was designed as a model of e f f i c i e n c y and organization. There were separate staircases for each class to th e i r dormitories, together with a separate courtyard with privacy for each class. A n c i l l a r y buildings including the washhouse, laundry, wards for persons a f f l i c t e d with contagious diseases, reception rooms and strong rooms for punishment were situated in the backyard and completed the i n s t i t u t i o n . According to Becher "the whole system is conducted upon the Principles of 111 Salutary Restraint and S t r i c t D i s c i p l i n e " and the building was designed to put this into practice. When compared to Kempthorne's plan, the Thurgaton Workhouse appears to be a rather awkward design, undoubtedly because Becher was an amateur architect, but there is a definite corre-lation between the two, which perhaps is inescapable when we consider the principles upon which they were organized. The most obvious factor that emerges from these reports is the lack of uniformity in both the buildings themselves and the management of the individual workhouses. They ranged from a small building in Skipton where eight people were maintained 112 under the charge of a Matron, through a "tolerably neat and convenient" workhouse in Blandford, Dorset where two paupers took care of the i n s t i t u t i o n and i t s t h i r t y six inmates in the 11 3 absence of the overseers, to the large, complex House of Industry at Newport on the Isle ofWight capable of accommodating seven hundred people, and the Thurgaton Workhouse conducted 52 upon the "principles of Salutary Restraint and S t r i c t D i s c i p l i n e " . 1 1 4 There was a perceptible change over the years: the idea of profitably employing the poor so that the workhouse was self sustaining was found to be u n r e a l i s t i c and workshop space was diminished, or disappeared altogether. With the increase in the number of paupers and the poor rates at the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth, there was a harsher attitude toward the poor. However, this did not happen instantly in 1834 but c l e a r l y began with the e a r l i e r experiments of the Rev. Robert Lowe and the Rev. John Becher. Lord Sherbrooke claimed that the New Poor Law was based on the principles that his father had established at 11 5 Bingham and in practice i t would seem that the Poor Law Commissioners were not at a l l innovative in t h e i r rules of management. These rules were in operation in more than one pre-1834 workhouse and represent a greater degree of continuity than has generally been accepted. There was also continuity in the practice of workhouse management because of the breakdown in some of the principles recommended for the administration of union workhouses. The Principle of National Uniformity which had been one of the cherished aims of the Commissioners in 1834 was not enforced 116 and local authorities were l e f t to devise their own p o l i c i e s . The system of s t r i c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of inmates was also eroded 53 because paupers were expected to do the household work and care for the sick in the i n s t i t u t i o n , with the result that within each sex there was an indiscriminate mixing of every 117 class of pauper. Another element of continuity is also evident in the c r i t i c i s m levelled at workhouses. Before and after 1834 workhouses were the object of public interest, and often disapproval. The poetry of the Rev. George Crabbe, was widely read and his poem "The V i l l a g e " published in 1783 included a description of the parish Poor House: "Theirs is yon House that holds the parish poor, Whose wall of mud scare bear the broken door; There, where the putrid vapours, flagging, play, And the dull wheel hums doleful through the day;-" 118 In contrast to this mean establishment he described, but with the same c r i t i c a l tone, a far more imposing workhouse in 1809: "Your Plan I love not; - with a number you Have placed your poor, your p i t i a b l e few: There, in one house, throughout th e i r lives to be, The pauper-palace which they hate to see: That giant building, that high-bounding wall, That large loud clock, which t o l l s each dreaded hour, Those gates and locks, and a l l those signs of power; It is a prison with a milder name, Which few inhabit without dread or shame." 119 Horror stories were not confined to the union workhouse, as James Neild t e s t i f i e d in his "Remarks on Norwich Workhouse" 120 published in The Gentleman's Magazine, October 1805. He described a f i l t h y , squalid building which was overcrowded and insanitary. No dayrooms were available and the inhabitants 54 lived, ate, as well as slept on their beds. Smallpox had taken an unnecessary t o l l because inmates had not been vaccinated and there was no attempt to isolate those who had contracted the disease. Consistent with the insanitary condition of the house, deaths averaged approximately one in every f i v e inmates. Most shocking to Neild was the sight of a twelve year old boy who had an iron c o l l a r with four projecting prongs round his neck and a strong iron ring fastened near his ankle, which was attached to a chain at the end of which was a log of wood weighing altogether twenty-two pounds. The boy's punishment was to last six months as a result of his being " i n c o r r i g i b l e " and upon investigation Neild effected his release. The new Poor Law st i r r e d an emotional response in many who f e l t compelled to write of i t s alleged inhumanity. The supreme example of this type of l i t e r a t u r e was G.R. Wythen 1 ? 1 Baxter's The Book of the Bastiles published in 1841. It was a virulent compilation of horror stories of the i l l treatment experienced by paupers in union workhouses, and although many of the accusations were found to be inaccurate or fa l s e , they added fuel to the anti-poor law campaign. 122 Mrs. Trollope in 1844 wrote Jessie P h i l l i p s , a sentimental novel about the cruelty of the new Poor Law and the new union workhouse. Her contention was that the flaw in the 1834 measure was lack of heart, of attention to the human element. She noted 55 that the Assistant Commissioners and the Guardians were s t i l l able to offer outdoor r e l i e f at their own discretion, but that they were often unable to identify the deserving cases because the union covered so large an area. Jessie P h i l l i p s experienced the indignity and torment of a combined workhouse, where no d i s t i n c t i o n s were made between the deserving and undeserving, young or old, sane or insane. The hardships that Mrs. Trollope described were not innovations of the union workhouse: they were an i n t r i n s i c part of l i f e in many workhouses prior to 1834, a fact which she does not point out. A.W. Pugin also believed that the commendable values of the past, of charity, benevolence, and concern for beauty, had been renounced in the nineteenth century, and in 1836, he published Contrasts or A P a r a l l e l between the Noble Edifices of the Middle Ages and Corresponding Buildings of the Present 123 Day; shewing The Present Decay of Taste. The T i t l e explains both the content of the book and Pugin's bias toward the middle ages and when he contrasted the residences for the poor, he obviously based this drawing on Kempthorne's hexagon plan, underlining i t s bleakness and severity, (fig.30) This is a mute but eloquent c r i t i c i s m of the new poorhouses. Clearly there is evidence that there was both continuity and change in the design and management of workhouses throughout the centuries, as well as in the perceptions of those in authority who were interested in the condition of the poor and the cost of their maintenance. 56 Conclusion The significance of the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 should not be underestimated, because although in practice i t was d i f f i c u l t to enforce, i t represented an attempt to deal with the problem of poverty on a national scale. Poor Law policy was not s t a t i c throughout the remainder of the century, but developed slowly u n t i l i t came closer in certain areas to the s p i r i t of the Commissioners' Report of 1834. It is true that the p r i n c i p l e of national uniformity had f a i l e d : "...the Poor Law Commissioners had f a i l e d to embody this in t h e i r Orders even with regard to able-bodied men; and 1 had by 1847, wholly abandoned i t in regard to other classes." However, by 1865 workhouses were recognized as being mainly the home of the helpless and innocent and the central Authority 125 changed i t s attitude to workhouse construction and regimen. According to the Medical Officer in 1867: "able-bodied people are now scarcely at a l l found in them during the greater part of the year... Those who enjoy the advantages of these i n s t i t u t i o n s are almost solely such as may f i t t i n g l y receive them viz the aged and infirm, the destitute sick and children. Workhouses are now asylums and infirmaries." 126 Consequently, the commitment to "less e l i g i b i l i t y " was greatly modified. In 1853 the Poor Law Board believed that paupers should have good medical attention and this automatically meant that they would be better cared for than would an independent labourer who often could not afford any medical 57 attendance. The q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of the Poor Law Medical Officers were "to be such as to ensure for the poor a degree of s k i l l in the i r medical attendants equal to that which can 127 be commanded by the more fortunate classes of the community." The change in attitude on the part of the Central Authority resulted in a continued e f f o r t to improve the workhouse and this e f f o r t was reflected in a closer attention 1 28 to architectural s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . Workhouse buildings were to be arranged in separate blocks or pavilions for reasons of hygiene and as a precaution against f i r e . Blocks were to be s u f f i c i e n t l y far apart to ensure the free passage of a i r and light and were not to be connected at a right angle or an acute angle. Minimum space requirements were given and s u f f i c i e n t ventilation was to be ensured throughout the building. Hot and cold water was to be provided in the bathrooms and sickrooms with a suitable kitchen and s c u l l e r i e s provided in connection with infirmary wards. The walls of a l l sick wards were to be plastered i n t e r n a l l y . One general dining hall was recommended, indicating some relaxation in the princip l e of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The yards for the children, sick and aged were to be enclosed with dwarf walls and palisades rather than high soli d walls, with covered play sheds to be provided where there were a large 129 number of children. A l l of these concessions represented a more humane approach toward the deserving poor. Dis c i p l i n e for the able-bodied was, however, not relaxed and in 1891 their yards were s t i l l enclosed by walls of six or seven feet and concern for d i s c i p l i n e was given as the reason for not allowing windows on boundary w a l l s . 1 3 0 This does sound like an echo of 58 Sir Francis Bond Head, yet there were ef f o r t s to make workhouse inte r i o r s more comfortable and cheerful and food more nourishing and varied. However, these improvements were l e f t to the 1 31 discretion of the six hundred Boards of Guardians. By 1871 the Central Authority began to recommend c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by i n s t i t u t i o n , reverting to the proposals in the 1834 Report. But again, they were dependent on the Boards of Guardians who considered the cost prohibitive; and ultimately such c l a s s i -f i c a t i o n proceeded only for children and the sick. The wheel had turned almost f u l l c i r c l e . Since complexity, continuity and ambiguity have been our theme, no neat and concise conclusion should be expected. The workhouse bui1ding boom was concentrated in the twenty years after the passing of the 1834 Act and our discussion has i l l u s t r a t e d the variety of workhouse designs. "Less e l i g i b i l i t y " and economy, the passion of Head, Chadwick and Southwood Smith sometimes shaped the exterior as well as the i n t e r i o r of buildings but, p a r t i c u l a r l y as time went on, the passion ebbed. Some unions, and not simply urban ones, b u i l t elaborate, ornamental and costly i n s t i t u t i o n s , tributes to the taste and c i v i c pride of t h e i r sponsors. Head's orig i n a l estimate was for a work-house to cost £4,300, whereas the City of London Workhouse cost in excess of £38,000 only fourteen years later, which at a time when i n f l a t i o n was not a relevant factor, was a vast increase, and demonstrates c o n f l i c t i n g values. 5 9 Workhouse architecture was not only influenced by the ideas of the Poor Law Commissioners, but by the Guardians and architects and evolved as a result of contemporary design practice in other i n s t i t u t i o n s as well as buildings s p e c i f i c a l l y for the poor. Before we judge i t too harshly, we must remember, as David Roberts points out in his a r t i c l e "How Cruel was the Victorian Poor Law", that the age was a harsh one, f u l l of cruelty and suffering and the workhouse should be seen in this 132 environment. Contemporaries believed that they were guided by humanitarian principles and were f u l f i l l i n g the needs of the poor, as a contributor to the Penny Magazine wrote: "in many respects the workhouse is preferable to the dwellings 1 33 of the labouring population in general." Certainly a l l workhouses were not b u i l t as prisons and they were, in many instances, far more attractive than housing designed for the independent labourer. The Victorian workhouse formed part of the architectural scene, expressing a complex mix of ideas, and must be judged in a nineteenth century context. 60 FOOTNOTES 1 S.E. Finer, The Life and Times of Sir Edwin Chadwick (London: Methuen & Co.Ltd., 1 952 ), p.70. 2 B r i t i s h Parliamentary Papers, Report from H.M.  Commissioners on the Administration a n d P r a c t i c a l  Operation of the Poor Laws with Appendix (A) Part 1  vol.8, 1834. (Shannon, I re 1 and: Irish University Press, 19/0), p. 127, 3 Report from H.M. Commissioners, p. 167. 4 Report from H.M. Commissioners, p.307 as quoted in Finer, p.85. 5 The Health of Nations, p.355 as quoted in Finer, p.85. 6 Sidney and Beatrice Webb, English Poor Law Policy (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1910), p. 56. 7 Webb, p.57. 8 Sidney and Beatrice Webb, eds., The Break-Up of the  Poor Law: Being Part One of the Minority Report of"  the Poor Law Commission (London: Longmans, Green and Co. , 1 909 ) , p.18. 9 B.P.P., F i r s t Annual Report of the Commissioners under  the Poor Law Amendment Act, Appendix (B), 183b, XXXV p.108. 10 S i r Francis Bond Head, "English Charity", in Descriptive  Essays Contributed to the Quarterly Review, 2 vols. ( London : John Murray, 1857), V, p. 84 . 11 Head, p.75. 12 Head, p.75. 13 F i r s t Annual Report, p.17. 14 Anna Dickens, "The Architect and the Workhouse", The  Architectural Review, clx (December, 1976), 345. 15 Unfortunately, according to Anna Dickens, there are no Kempthorne papers. He emigrated to New Zealand in 1841 where he practiced unt i l his death in 1873. 61 15 Kempthorne1s writing on workhouses was limited to a l e t t e r contained in The Second Annual Report  of the Commissioners under the Poor Law Amendment"  Act, Append i x (C ) "Remarks on Dr. Arnott's System of Warming and Ventilating as applied to Workhouses", p.450. 16 G. Gilbert Scott, ed., Personal and Professional  Recollections by the late Sir George Gilbert Scott, R.A. (London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle & Rivington, 1879), p.76. 17 Howard Colvin, A Biographical Dictionary of B r i t i s h Architects 1600-1840 (London: John Murray, 1978), p.486. 18 Scott, P .77. 19 Scott, P .77. 20 Scott, P .81. 21 Scott, P .85. 22 " F i r s t Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners", The Architectural Magazine, (November, 1835), p.512. 23 George Gilbert Scott and Wm. Bonython Moffatt, Exp 1anatory Remarks on a Design for a Workhouse for the Newton Abbot  Union, Devon R.O. P.L.U. Newton Abbot 22. 24 John Bowring, ed., The Works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols. (New York: Russell & Russel1 Inc. , 1962), IV, 36. 25 Robin Evans, "Bentham's Panopticon: An Incident in the Social History of Architecture", Architectural Association Quarterly, 3 (July 1971), 21. 26 Bowring, p.39. 27 John Bowring, ed., The Works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols. (New York: Russell & Russell Inc. , 1962) , VIII, pp.369-374. 28 Robin Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue (Cambridge: University Press, 1982) , p. 222 . 29 Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue, p.222. 30 Samuel Tuke, Description of The Retreat: An Institution Near York for Insane Persons, (York: W. Alexander, 1813), 62 31 Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue, p.261. 32 Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue, p.261. 33 Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue, p.265. 34 Evans, The Fabrication of Virtue, p.266. 35 Helen Rosenau, Social Purpose in Architecture: Paris and London Compared 1760-1800 (London: Studio Vista, 1970), p.52. 36 Robert Kerr, The Gentleman's House (London: J. Murray 1865), p.64. 37 Mark Girouard, Life in the English Country House (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1980 ), p . 271. 38 F i r s t Annual Report, p.29. 39 B.P.P. Second Annual Report of the Commissioners under  the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1836 XXIX,p.23. 40 4 & 5 William IV Sec.25. as quoted in Webb, English  Poor Law Policy, p.19. 41 Erving Goffman, Asy1 urns (New York: Anchor Books, 1961), p. 7. 42 F i r s t Annual Report, p.8. 43 Dickens, p.347. 44 Hansard, CXV (New Series, April 1851), 1260-1 as quoted in John Nelson Tarn, Five Per Cent Phi1anthropy (Cambridge: University Press, 1973), p.13. 45 Dickens, p.345. 46 David Cole, The Work of Sir George Gilbert Scott (London: The Architectural Press, 1980 ) , p. 1 . 47 Scott, p.78. 48 Scott, p.78. 49 Scott, p.81. 50 Scott, p.82. 51 Scott, p.82. 52 Scott, Explanatory Remarks 63 53 Scott, Explanatory Remarks. 54 Anna Dickens, "Architects and the Union Workhouse of the New Poor Law" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Sussex, 1982) 55 Second Annual Report, p.154. 56 Letter to The Poor Law Commissioners, from Dr. Southwood Smith, 27 October 1838. 57 Roderick O'Donnell, "W.J. Donthorn (1799-1859): Architecture with 'great hardness and decision in the edges' ", Architectural History, 21 (1978), 89. 58 Anne Digby, Pauper Palaces (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 19/8), p.66. 59 O'Donnell, p.89. 60 Digby, p.66. 61 Dickens, "Architects and the Union Workhouse" p.25. 62 Sussex R.O. Rye Union Minutes 6.8/1a5, 3 July 1843, p.293. 63 Rye Union Minutes, 10 October 1842, p.14. 64 Rye Union Minutes, 30 January 1843, p.151. 65 Letter to the Guardians of the Poor of the Caxton and Arrington Union, from W.T. Nash, 27 June 1836. Cambridge R.O. 66 "Abingdon Workhouse", B r i t i s h Almanac, 1836, p.235. 67 Scott, Explanatory Remarks 68 Explanatory Particulars for the Ely Union Workhouse ( i n i t i a l l e d W.J.D.) 1837, Cambridgeshire R.O. G/E (uncata 1ogued ). 69 Circular l e t t e r from the Poor Law Board to Boards of Guardians 15 June 1868 in Twenty-first Annual  Report of the Poor Law Board 1868-9, Appendix, p.47. 70 Rev. George Crabbe, Poetical Works, 8 vols. (London: John Murray, 1834) III, 287. 71 Crabbe, p.287. 72 "Kensington Union Workhouse", The Builder, (1 January 1848) p.28. 64 73 Mark Girouard, The Victorian Country House (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1979) p.37. 74 "Birmingham New Workhouse", The Builder, (31 January 1852) p.71. 75 The Builder, (31 January 1852) p.71. 76 Architectural Magazine, p.511. 77 The Builder, (31 January 1852) p.71. 78 J.M. Granville, "Lunatic Asylums", Quarterly Review 101 p.364 as quoted in Andrew T. S c u l l , Museums of  Madness (London: Allen Lane, 1979), p.HJTH 79 Frances Power Cobbe, "Workhouse Sketches", MacMi Hans  Magazine 3 (April 1861) 456. 80 Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts  of Pollution and Taboo (London: Pelican Books, 1970) p.12 as quoted in Leonore Davidoff "Mastered for L i f e : Servant and Wife in Victorian and Edwardian England", Journal of Social History 7 (1973/4) 412. 81 The Builder, 31 January 1852, p.71. 82 Second Annual Report, Appendix (C), p.450. 83 Watson and Pritchett, Plans, Elevations, Sections and  Description of the Pauper Lunatic Asylum lately erected  at Wakefield for the West Riding of Yorkshire; to which is added, a New and Enlarged Edition of Mr. Samuel Tuke's  Pract i c a l Hints on the Construction and Economy of Pauper Lunatic Asylums (York: W~! Alexander, 1819) 84 Watson and Pritchett, p.30. 85 Robert Sommer, Tight Spaces. Hard Architecture and How  to Humanize i t (Englewood C l i f f s , N.J. : Prentice-Hal 1 Inc. , 1 974 ) , p.2. 86 Sommer, p.7. 87 John Nelson Tarn, Five Per Cent Philanthropy (Cambridge: University Press, 1973), p.46. 88 Dorothy Marshall, The English Poor in the Eighteenth  Century (London: George Routledge & Sons Ltd., 1 926 ) , p. 127. 89 Report from H.M. Commissioners, p.510A. 90 S i r Frederic Morton Eden, The State of the Poor, ed. by A.G.L. Rogers (New York"! E.P. Dutton and Company, 1 929) , p.51. 65 91 Eden, p.51. 92 Eden, p.202. 93 W. Gilpin and others, An Account of a New Poor House  erected in the Parish of Boldre in the New Forest"  Near Lymington (London: A. Strahan, 1803 ) , p.6. 94 G i l p i n , p.6. 95 G i l p i n , p.7. 96 An Account of the Workhouses in Great Brita i n in the Year M.DCC,XXXII, 3d., (London: W. Brown, LXXXVI) 97 An Account of the Workhouses, p . x i i . 98 An Account of the Workhouses, p .3. 99 An Account of the Workhouses, p .4. 100 Eden, p.149. 101 Report from H. M. Commi ss ioners, p.469. 102 Eden, p.285. 103 Eden, p.286. 104 Eden, p.287. 105 Eden, p.299. 106 Eden, p.94. 107 Report from H. M. Commissioners, p.612. 108 Report from H. M. Commi ss i oners, p.179a 109 In a l e t t e r to i Becher, Lowe claimed to to introduce these p r i n c i p l e s , although he allowed that Becher "extended the system over an immense tract of country..." A. Patchett Martin, Life and Letters  of the Right Honourable Robert Lowe, Viscount Sherbrooke, G.C.B.,D.C.L., Z vols. (London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1893), p.50. 110 The Rev. John Thomas Becher, M.A., The Anti-Pauper System, (London: W. Simpkin .and R. Marshall"; 1834) , p.9. 111 Becher , p.9. 66 112 Eden, p.365. 113 Eden, p.176. 114 Becher, p.9. 115 Mart in , p.50. 116 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.84. 117 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.66. 118 Rev. George Crabbe, Poetical Works, 8 vols. (London: John Murray, 1834) II, 83. 119 Crabbe, III, p.287. 120 James Neild, "Remarks on Norwich Workhouse", The Gentleman's Magazine, LXXV (October, 1805), 893 121 G.R. Wythen Baxter, The Book of the Bastiles (London: John Stephens, 1841. 122 Frances Trollope, Jessie P h i l l i p s (London: Henry Colburn, 1844) 123 A. Welby Pugin, Contrasts or A. Par a l l e l between the  Noble Edifices of the Middle Ages and Corresponding - Buildings of the Present Day; shewing The Present  Decay of Taste (London: Charles Dolman, 1841). 124 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.83. 125 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.83. 126 Dr. E. Smith, Medical Officer to the Poor Law Board, in Twentieth Annual Report, 1867-8, p.43. as quoted in Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.134. 127 Mr. Baines (President of the Poor Law Board) 12 July 1853; Hansard, vol. 129, p.138. as quoted in Webb, English Poor  Law Policy, p.117. 128 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.134. 129 Twenty F i r s t Annual Report Appendix, pp.46-51. 130 Percival Gordon Smith, Hints and Suggestions as to the  Planning of Poor Law Buildings (London: Knight and Co., 1901 ) , p.66. 131 Webb, English Poor Law Policy, p.140. 132 David Roberts, "How Cruel was the Victorian Poor Law?", Hi s t o r i c a l Journal, 6 (January 1963), 106. "The Economy of an English Workhouse", The Penny  Magazine of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful  Knowledge, (b July 1839) p.264. 68 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Government Publications B r i t i s h Parliamentary Papers, Report from H.M. Commissioners  on the Administration and Practical Operation of the Poor Laws. Vol.8. 1834. Shannon, Ireland: Irish University Press. 1970. B r i t i s h Parliamentary Papers. F i r s t Annual Report of the  Commissioners under the Poor Law Amendment Act. 1835, XXXV. Br i t i s h Parliamentary Papers. Second Annual Report of the  Commissioners under the Poor Law Amendment Act. 1836. XX1X. B r i t i s h Parliamentary Papers. Twenty-First Annual Report of the Poor Law Board. 1868-9, XXV111 . Contemporary Sources "Abingdon Workhouse". B r i t i s h Almanac, (1836) An Account of the Workhouses in Great Brita i n  M , D C C , X X X T T : London: W. Brown, LXXXVI. Baxter, G.R. Wythen. The Book of the Bastiles. London: John Stephens,1841. Becher, The Rev. John Thomas. The Anti-Pauper System. London: W. Simpkin and R. Marsha 1 1, 1834. Bowring, John, ed. The Works of Jeremy Bentham. 11 vols. New York: Russell & Russel1 Inc. , 1962. Brereton, The Rev. Charles David. An Inquiry into the Workhouse  System and the Law of Maintenance in Agricultural D i s t r i c t s . Norwich: J. Hatchard and Son, 1825. Cobbe, Frances Power. "Workhouse Sketches". MacMillans Magazine, 3 (April 1861) 448-461. "The City of London Union Workhouse". The Builder, (25 August 1849) p.378. Crabbe, The Rev. George. Poetical Works. 8 vols. London: John Murray, 1834. Dunmow Union Workhouse, (l e t t e r s on the alleged insanitary character of the site) without a t i t l e page. pp. 234-236. in the Year 69 Eden, Sir Frederic Morton. The State of the Poor. Ed. by A.G.L. Rogers. New York: E.P. Dutton and Company, 1929. "Explanatory Particulars for the Ely Union Workhouse" ( i n i t i a l l e d WJD) 1837, Cambridgeshire R.O. G/E (uncatalogued). " F i r s t Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners". The  Architectural Magazine, (November 1835) pp.511-512. Gi l p i n , W. and others. An Account of a New Poor House erected  in the Parish of Boldre, in the New Forest, Near Lymington. London : IV. Strahan , 1803. Head, Sir Francis Bond. "English Charity", Descriptive Essays  Contributed to the Quarterly Review, 2 vols. London: John Murray, 1857. Kerr, Robert. The Gentleman's House. London: J. Murray, 1865. Nash, W.T. Letter to the Guardians of the Poor of the Caxton and Arrington Union, 27 June 1836.Nash Archive. Cambridge R.O. Neild, James. "Remarks on Norwich Workhouse". TheGentleman's  Magazine, LXXV (October, 1805) 891-1125. Pugin, A. Welby. Contrasts or A P a r a l l e l between the Noble • Edifices of the Middle Ages and Corresponding Buildings of  the Present Day, shewing The Present Decay of Taste. London: Charles Dolman, 1841. Scott, G. Gilbert ed. Personal and Professional Recollections  by the late Sir George Gilbert Scott, R.A. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle & Rivington, 1879. Smith, Percival Gordon. Hints and Suggestions as to the Planning  of Poor Law Buildings. London: Knight and Co., 1901. Sussex R.O. Rye Union Minutes G8/1a5 Tuke, Samuel. Description of The Retreat: An Institution Near  York for Insane Persons. York: W~! Alexander, 1813. Troll-ope, Frances. Jessie Phi 11 ips. London: Henry Colburn, 1844. Wansey, Henry. Thoughts on Poor-Houses with a view to th e i r  general reform, p a r t i c u l a r l y that of Salisbury comparing i t  with more improved ones of Shrewsbury, Isle of Wight, H u l f T  Boldre, etc. London: T. Cadell, jun. and W. Davies, 1801. Watson and Pr i t c h e t t . Plans, Elevations, Sections and Description  of the Pauper Lunatic Asylum la t e l y erected at Wakefield for" the West Riding of Yorkshire; to which is added, a new and 70 enlarged Edition of Hr. Samuel Tuke's Practical Hints on  the Construction and Economy of Pauper Lunatic Asylums. York: W. Alexander, 1819. Secondary Sources Anstruther, Ian. The Scandal of the Andover Workhouse. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1973. Baugh, D.A. "The cost of Poor Relief in South-East England". The Economic History Review. Second Series. XXVIII (1975), 50-68. Blaug, Mark. "The Myth of the Old Poor Law and the Making of the New". The Journal of Economic History, XXIII (June, 1963), 151 -184": Blaug, Mark. "The Poor Law Report Reexamined." The Journal  of Economic History, XXIX (1964), 229-245. Bonta, Juan Pablo. Architectureand i t s Interpretation. New York: Ri z z o l i International Publications Inc., 19/9. Brundage, Anthony. The Making of the New Poor Law. London: Hutchinson & Co. (Publishers) Ltd., 1978. Coats, A.W. "Economic Thought and Poor Law Policy in the Eighteenth Century". The Economic History Review. XIII (1960), 39-51. Cole, David. The Work of S i r George Gilbert Scott. London: The Architectural Press, 1980. Colvin, Howard. A Biographical Dictionary of B r i t i s h Architects 1600-1840. London: John Murray, 1978. Crowther, M.A. The Workhouse System 1834-1929. London: Batsford Academic and Educational Ltd., 1981. Dickens, Anna. "The architect and the Workhouse", The Architectural  Review, clx (December 1976), 345-352. Dickens, Anna. "Architects and the Union Workhouse of the New Poor Law" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Sussex, 1982). 71 Digby, Anne. Pauper Palaces. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978. Dixon, Roger and Stefan Muthesius. Victorian Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press, \WhT~. Dyos, H.J. and Michael Wolff. The Victorian City: Images and  and R e a l i t i e s . 2 vols. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973 Edsa l l , Nicholas C. The Anti-Poor Law Movement 1834-44. Manchester: University Press, 1971. Evans, Robin. "Bentham's Panopticon: An Incident in the" Social History of Architecture" Architectural Association Quarterly 3 (July 1971), 21-37. Evans, Robin. The Fabrication of Virtue. Cambridge: University Press-; 1982. Finer, S.E. The Life and Times of Sir Edwin Chadwick. London: Methuen & Co.Ltd., 1952 Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish. Trans, by Alan Sheridan. London: Allen Lane, Penguin Books Ltd. 1977. Gauldie, Enid. Cruel Habitations. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1974" Girouard, Mark. Lif e in the English Country House. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1980. Girouard, Mark. The Victorian Country House. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1979. Goffman, Erving. Asylums. New York: Anchor Books, 1961. Hampson, E.M. The Treatment of Poverty in Cambridgeshire 1597-1834. Cambridge: University Press. 1934. Henriques, Ursula. "How Cruel Was the Victorian Poor Law?" The H i s t o r i c a l Journal, x i , 2 (1968), 365-371. Ignatieff, Michael. A Just Measure of Pain. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1978. King, Anthony, ed. Buildings and Society: Essays on the Social  Developments of the Built Environment. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980. Longmate, Norman. The Workhouse. London: Temple Smith Ltd., 1974. 72 Martin, A. Patchett. Life and Letters of the Right Honourable  Robert Lowe, Viscount~Sherbrooke, G. C. B . , D. C . L. , 2 vols. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1893. Marshall, Dorothy. The English Poor in the Eighteenth  Century. London: George Routledge & Sons Ltd., 1926. O'Donnell, Roderick. "W.J. Donthorn (1799-1859): architecture with 'great hardness and decision in the edges' " Architectural  History. 21 (1978), 83-91. Owen, David. English Philanthropy 1600-1960. Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1964. Poynter, J.R. Society and Pauperism: English Ideas on Poor  Relief 1795-183"4\ London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1969. Roberts, David. "How Cruel was the Victorian Poor Law?" The  Hi s t o r i c a l Journal,6 No. 1 . ( 1963 ), 97- 107 . Rose, Michael E. "The Allowance System under the New Poor Law". The Economic History Review Second Series XIX (1966), 607-620. Rosenau, Helen. Social Purpose in Architecture: Paris and London  Compared 1760 - T8UTJ London: Studio Vista, 1970. Sc u l l , Andrew T. Museums of Madness. London: Allen Lane Penquin Books Ltd., 1979. Sommer, Robert. Tight Spaces. Hard Architecture and How to  Humanize i t . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J: Prentice-Hall Inc., T974. Tarn, John Nelson. Five Per Cent Philanthropy. Cambridge: University Press, 1973. Tarn, John Nelson. Working C1 ass Housing in Nineteenth Century  B r i t a i n . London: Lund and Humphries, 1971. Webb, Sidney and Beatrice. English Poor Law Policy. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1910. Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, eds. The Break-Up of the Poor Law, Being Part One of the Minority Report of the Poor Law Commission. London : Longmans, Green and Co., 1909. | - J M « T W A L I t f O t T O F T H E F O O f c L A W C O M M I S S I O P t D t S 1. F i g - 1 A J T K N M X (A) N* lO i ~ " P L A N or » K u t A L WORKHOUSt, r o * J O O r c K i o N i \ Br 11 • r i A N C i l Bono HLAD. A A A mSove tu U¥*U aJ 2*low a.re> cf/yrrnj/o ne.f B C a/Tp halts 77ie darrrtt/xfriej{(m aec0u.ru ofthe beds) «r* tJfkrl Oi UftgtA, dg to in. breadth-Those on. the ground floor, aj aZ/v they'-' * alb B B a. re seven. feme m height, those on the upper floor are eight feme in, height . of -mhxch €*vo feet are, in the roof The wm&s of the. lower tfarrnitorisis are, a Brick etna, m ?uUf thick, those, of the upper, as aZfa the partition wa/£e, a firiek thick.. The Dicing A*ZZJ C C the Was* house. * the Pthding mens are eight fret tn. height. The text* ing rrtom. JCifrhr/t., Store. • room Oot»errte>rs morn, flrrsf, fhrrtmitts*, room, are, nine fe£t in height, the rooms nhoue, are tight, feet, high Y-B. The darmitariej should. Se, nrn/j.7afssJ &g east iron- grattnge of the stje of u brirk t4> A-/tlaced in the- inferior t/*u/ls. zms+tsdiats/g Se/orv the, ceilings. In. the half* the exterior i&all jAuuM Se nentilatrd in like, manner. 'aj c -m*' 1 j lrtt> This Workhoujt fvrJOO fb-sonj with tanks drasns. gutters &c l*c complete, eterg thing t" be of the. test muter, aJj haj Seen con trotted fvr tn J\'ertt frrthe Sum of\f4j0o. — » y s i m i l a r flan for 4*>0jbr*vns u mlso Budding if* JCtnX /or the Jum of_fJJJJ — Both fUmj are /funded on the print tp/r that tn the eortxtrustijm, cf a Aural Work . house. the height of the rooms, the tAfytness of the toads kt Jte shauld not ejrts>ehTwft di.. mansions of the cottage o/'the honcJS+hard^ . working irrdependent lsL&ourrr4 wet/ Sue It * suhstanfra/ n»om* Setng a Itvjceery as attrar. five to rAe pauper as food si rausnent . *<' A If the six fottagcj A a he omitted tAe Suf/ding will then onlg contain -404 persons. Cool Nome SAr*i far tAe tn<in/i n/v Ann «u o a s J C IhmtujHall IJ Jr ttsAhems* J] NB The h**m Wit*df*~ F omr fA* <**U**nmf c**—**st*d* a mese of tAe irAol* httahl*sAment J M tAe ufper Hoiy tA*jr KasUng rot" tmd l)*s*mg A**J7 form nn* hail 73 St ale if Feet L Z~ Z 1 •*f>0 Orderea by the l l o u i e of Conwnonj to be pr inted 10 "Au*u j t 1835 jZZZXZTEZ^Zt^ ^1-1^ . A Oe/yem/ /deet,o/\i, PENITENTIARY PANOPTICON -in, an,Improved,, but asy.t.fJnnP?.^)J.<)Jj, C/t/irushes/ Steffi-. See Postaertpl'Re/bre-fuej/ to Pfo-n,, Elei'a.tfoet,;ktSeef/ott. foeirtp Pttrfe re/irrrd •/// //.<••. \? '?J. E X P L A N A T I O N B t o C. (irwtt. . it. „ic/„r S/.J-/.iy/l/ I). __ C r - / / fnfflerim-K, F fny/r/itin' (itt//sr4/:\ Cr e^ft4ifn7- {'tit/aits r l Jfl.\ptWprs /.ptft/f-1 f)<>mt: i>/'//is- f"/i(if>r/. K SAyLicr'/>i. /<• />" L . _ Stpi;- .liat'i/i* y>-. /trf/t f/u'ir <"rti//rti< H'il/irti f/if i'ie/i r ifff// tt// rot* n/J,p/<trfs Jeu N. Ct.rcidJdtr (tyriujuj in. d'.' (''pen f.rr.yd tit- ('/, O Annn/ar H'tiff/rums faj* to boffin n,,/br /J^rhi atid/ sejtantliim/. /.'-„«. i .\7J<.; /.<•*.. A I' I' K \ I > I /. A N i l ) H E X A C O N ' P L A N or A W O R K H O U S E . T O C O N T A I N 300 f » U f [ ^ S . MEN'S YARD. A I'P K S ' D I X ! \ ; N ° lO S Q U A R E : P L A N O F A W O H K M O U S L , T O C O N T A I N 300 ° « . » t « < N = I C R O U M > f . » S T T J . J . R O O M S O Y i Y A R D cn 00 113. Panopticon House of Industry, Samuel Bentham and Samuel Bunce, 1 797. F i g . 9 Fig. 10 6 Dunmow Poor Law Institution, 1838. Entrance. A late example with Tudor details and patterned brickwork — red with blue diaper and gault quoins: a contrast to the austere Kempthorne drawing Fig.11 8 Amersham Poor Law Institution, 1838. View. A characteristic use of flint and brick BlickJing Hall, by Robert Lyminge, c. 1616-27 84 Fig.14 - Ely Cathedral 85 7 Windsor Poor Law Institution, 1838. View F i g . 1 5 Rye Union Workhouse 87 Fig.18 Battle Union Workhouse •ir n i» i h c i i n r F i t ! I I I ] r i n • 11 • B i l l 1II H M m III J • 1] Battle Abbey III;NI:IIAI. in.ot 'K V I . A N . F E M A L E I AIRING CROUND M A L E AIRINC cnouND CLAf.T. 3. ABLE MEN CLASS I, ABLE M E N T EM A LE AlfllNQ GROUND MALE AIRINC CROUND DRTINC CROUND ^ f S p l N l H C p v ' i 1 $ 1 i s m : * CLASS I. AGLE WOMEN Si i t a CLA5 ARLE WOMEN ski** X T — I : -rtr IINtlUUY MEN re* :f:. UNRULY WOMEN I P * L. 89 Fig.20 City of London Workhouse -Block Plan ! II. i ('. . U. K. I "• I I . \)\ i K . I.. M N . O . r. u. u. Jlfifrr l 'or l r r 'n IOIIRC * u d rotnrnittfc ruotut. i l »Tc i f lug wnrtli . M u s l r r ' s ullivc. M.'i>trr'n riMMii, M a t r o n ' s room. Sturrs . A."!*!!*tnrtt mmti 'r . A ' . tMmi t (natrons. Jul.mi nit:n. Mnrr 'e i l counti's' t ' l M i i r i N . A.tr;nlcn. U n r u l y men. A Win-bodied men. Slnrrn. Itiihccitn w . i n h . Al j l r -hoi l i f i l t romcn. U n r u l y nom»*M. l n l i r m women. cncfi. S. C:iiil.lrrn 'I'. V. l.:mnilrj. \ \ \ M - i . . - i i „ -V . Ccn'ral c i i i . . q -Ol » l i f li-St. .,.*» S.rulVrj. Kit'Mtcn. I'iiii'rr. M : i l - ' i . . (jrunn-J. l'l'liin-f tin / ' . I'tvi i' nur \fj. W V U i o u 0 5 10 20 30 40 50 SCM.E QF ',i ',. i t . - - r - ' -A Master'* Honsc B Mistress's House C Dinine-liall, Sic. I) Chapel E llovs G Girl H School 1 Infants K Probationary Children I J Infirm Women M Inf irm M m N Disorderly Men O Able Women P Disorderly Women Q Able Men R Kitrhrn Court S Adult.' J>i i i i i i K - l inl l T Stores, Domestic Offices, and Government Apartments U Femnle Tramps V Male Tramps W Male Probationers X Female Probationers Y Court Z Board-Offices (i Lying-in Ward b Kpileptic * Sick d Dirty e Ferer jf Rpilcptie g {'luur.uiill to ho C O ro Al.iurtw "Worlihmwe. 94 Fig. 25 21 Columbia Square, the street elevation of one block. Fig. 27 9 6 43 S a l t a i r e , a s treet o f c h e a p e r h o u s i n g . s Housing is an Industrial Investment 5 0 W o l v c r t o n , a r a i l w a y t o w n , s t a r t e d 1849. 97 98 Fig. 30 9 M O D E R N P O O P . H O U S E CONTRASTS© R&SfSfiWGES FOR r«e POOR a i i T i e « T POOR « O Y S £ . 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items