- Jun 2024
-
www.lrb.co.uk www.lrb.co.uk
-
In 1880 Britain could with some justification be called the ‘workshop of the world’: it produced more than 20 per cent of global industrial output and about 40 per cent of the world’s manufactured exports. In the nearly half-century since Samuel published his essay of that name, historians have done much to undermine the narrative of an ‘industrial revolution’ bookended by the invention of the spinning jenny in 1764 and the New Poor Law of 1834.
There's an interesting linkage going on here between the industrial revolution (and thus possibly Capitalism) with the creation and even litigation of "the poor" classes in Britain.
Did "the poor" exist in the same way they do today prior to the Industrial Revolution? What are the subtle differences? (Compare with Thompson, E. P. “Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism.” Past & Present, no. 38 (1967): 56–97.)
-
- Mar 2024
-
-
History of the United States (1834)
1834 was also interesting with respect to this thesis as Britain was working at the "principles of 1834" which Beatrice Webb focused on and debunked in English Poor Law Policy (1910).
see: https://hypothes.is/a/NLJSJAe7Ee2xvIeHyTL7vQ
Would this 1832 work in Britain have bleed over to a similar set of poverty principles in the United States in the same era? Could this have compounded issues in America leading to greater class divisions in the decades before the Civil War?
-
the first volume of GeorgeBancroft’s widely praised History of the United States (1834) may be thebest example of how the Mayflower and Arbella washed ashore and seededthe ground where love of liberty bore its ripest fruit
-
- Apr 2023
-
theodora.com theodora.com
-
Tradesmen, too, were quick to see that the exchange might be worked to their advantage; they brought unsaleable stock from their shops, exchanged it for labour notes, and then picked out the best of the saleable articles. Consequently the labour notes began to depreciate; trouble also arose with the proprietors of the premises, and the experiment came to an untimely end early in 1834.
The labour exchange at Gray's Inn Road which began on September 3, 1832, which was based on Robert Owen's idea in The Crisis (June 1832), eventually collapsed in 1834 as the result of Greshham's Law in which "bad money drives out good." In this case, rather than money the object was the relative value of goods which were exchanged based on Labour notes. Labour notes were used to exchange unsaleable stock in shops for labour notes which were then used to purchase more valuable goods. This caused depreciation of the labor notes ultimately causing the experiment to collapse in 1834.
-
- Jul 2022
-
Local file Local file
-
; until, in 1907, eachclass had come to be dealt with according to principles which wereobviously very different from those of 1834. The report of this investi¬gation was presented to the Poor Law Commission, with the interest¬ing result that we heard no more of the “ principles of 1834 ”! It wassubsequently published as English Poor Law Policy (1910).
Beatrice Webb studied the effects of the British "principles of 1834" and how they were carried out (differently) from area to area to see the overall effects through 1907. The result of her study apparently showed what a poor policy it had been to the point that no one mentioned the old "principles of 1834" again.
How might this sort of sociological study be carried out on the effects of laws within the United States now in terms of economics and equality for various movements like redlining, abortion, etc.? Is anyone doing this sort of work?
There is an example of the Eviction Lab at Princeton has some of this sort of data and analysis. https://evictionlab.org/map
-
- May 2022
-
Local file Local file
-
The term “scientist” is aneologism, coined jocularly by William Whewell in 1834.
"Scientist" is a neologism coined in 1834, by William Whewell and was originally meant tongue-in-cheek.
Who coined the word "scientist" in 1834? :: William Whewell
-