Katlyn Fix
HIST 2111
Essay #2
The Welfare Reform of the Nineteenth Century
During the first half of the nineteenth century, the poverty of many households in the
United States became an obvious problem. The number of poor families was very high, and
intervention became necessary. This triggered a welfare reform that did not work, but it did
shape some of the things that we, as a nation, still do today.1
At the time, the number of cities was increasing, causing an increase in wage jobs. The
number of people living in urban areas went from under half a million to 1.8 million in less than
twenty years. Many of the people moving to the cities had previously lived in rural areas and
wanted to try city life as the U.S. was rapidly industrializing. There was no minimum wage law,
so the wages of their new jobs were often too low to pay for a family’s basic needs, driving them
into poverty. This made for especially hard winters, even tougher sicknesses, and a harsh reality
check during some unpredictable stoppages in commerce. This was the story for many people
with new wage jobs.2
As more and more families became impoverished, the poor community became more
vocal about the severity of their problems. Seeing people scavenging for wood, begging in the
streets, and attempting to obtain any job that opened was a common occurrence. Sometimes the
poor would take even more extreme measures by stealing to get by.3
The crime that the poor committed became a problem. Many of them turned to alcohol as
a refuge, which caused drunken unlawfulness that law enforcement couldn’t keep up with.
Others became desperate to the point of theft. This was a particularly common case among
children who had lost their parental guidance. People definitely began noticing the poverty
1
Seth Rockman, Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth Rockman (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003), 1-6.
Rockman, 1-2; and James A. Henretta, America: A Concise History, ed. James A. Henretta (Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin’s 2010), 276-277.
3
Rockman, 24; and “Subjects of the New York House of Refuge,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth
Rockman (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003), 85-91.
2
problem when the crime rates went up, and they wanted to be able to control the increasingly
dangerous socioeconomic class.4
Once the poverty had been brought into light, people began to realize its potential
problems. The United States had been created on the basis that all men were created equal. The
high amount of people being reduced to poverty seemed to contradict this principle. The U.S.
was also started on the principle that power should be dispersed. When higher classes realized
that the government was controlling the labor market, they wanted to do something about it.5
Another problem that the poverty presented was a political imbalance. If too many people
became impoverished, they could gain political power, since there were no longer property
restrictions on voting. This motivated political leaders to take charge on the poverty issues. They
didn’t want to lose their power in politics.6
Aside from the power aspect, people were noticing poverty for its sheer awfulness. Some
equated it with or said it was even worse than slavery, another hot issue of the times. The poor
wage workers were under the same “hard work, no benefits” kind of conditions as the slaves.
The difference is that the slaves were born into slavery. The people working for wages usually
didn’t have the financial problems for their entire lives. Some argue that this made being poor
harder to handle.7
When poverty had been noticed, both the government and private church and
philanthropic groups began to make relief efforts. Supplying relief had two major concerns: Who
gets to pay, and how will it be regulated?8
4
“Subjects of the New York House of Refuge”, 85-91; Rockman, 4; and Henretta, 281.
Rockman, 2-5.
6
Rockman, 7-8.
7
Orestes A. Brownson, “The Laboring Classes,” Documents to Accompany America’s History, ed. Melvin Yazawa
(Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 249-250.
8
Rockman, 5-6.
5
The two sources of relief were the government and private organizations (churches,
charities, etc.). The government began supplying relief to people who had a claim in the
community. Private organizations began funding specific groups such as widows and orphans.
Both had problems finding ways to limit their efforts.9
Regulating the relief was a hard task for anyone who was willing to help. It was hard to
determine who deserved how much. Both the government and private groups needed to figure
out what types of help would not be a waste of time and money.10
Two main types of relief were created and funded by both suppliers: outdoor and indoor
relief. Outdoor relief was direct aid, including food, fuel, clothing, and cash. Recipients were not
required to move to a certain place. They could stay in the place where they had already been
residing. Indoor relief was relief where recipients were required to leave their homes as in
almshouses. Both had their problems, but both helped relieve poverty little by little.11
Not only did the government and charitable groups want to help the poor, they wanted to
make them equal. Extremists such as Thomas Skidmore took this to the point of returning the
property of the deceased to the state. Majority of others had no intentions of giving up
inheritance. Instead, they focused on education. Proper schooling was reserved only for the high
class children at the time. Many people began to turn to the idea of public education as a solution
to the economic inequality problem. Schooling became available by some church groups in the
beginning of the reform. Eventually, the government caught up and started the public school
system still in effect today.12
9
Rockman, 6.
Rockman, 5-6.
11
Rockman, 5-7.
12
Paul E. Johnson, “Religious Reform as a Form of Social Control,” Major Problems in American History, ed.
Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2007), 290-291; Thomas Skidmore, “Rights of Man
10
Although the relief efforts were in full effect, they still had some problems. The
boundaries for receiving relief had very thin lines. Some people who didn’t deserve the help
received it, and some people who needed all they could get, didn’t get much at all. This problem
was partially caused by the large amount of people trying to get relief. The competition was high.
The government as well as private organizations usually gave relief to the people who wanted
the least, leaving the others with nothing.13
Another issue with the reform was the lack of effectiveness in many cases. With outdoor
relief, the amount of goods and money given to poor families was barely sufficient enough for
living. Indoor relief, such as almshouses, didn’t have much better conditions than the recipients’
previous poverty-stricken lives. The rules were strict, the food was bland, and they were
crowded. The living conditions were anything but ideal, driving many people away from the
option. The relief plan definitely did not do what it was intended to do.14
The minute amount of improvement that came out of the reform came at a large cost. The
government had been spending a very large amount of money to help the people in poverty.
Some local governments were spending so much on relief that they were almost breaking their
budgets. Private organizations gave out as much as they could to give help to those who needed
it. These monetary efforts just weren’t enough to raise the poor out of their sad lifestyles.15
The welfare reform in the first half of the nineteenth century was not a success. It did not
accomplish its goals of bringing the poor out of poverty. It made the problem a more obvious
issue and produced a few unsuccessful efforts at saving those who needed to be saved. The only
to Property,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth Rockman (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003), 136138; Henretta, 268; and Rockman, 27-28.
13
Rockman, 7.
14
Rockman, 6-7; and “Rules and Regulations of the Salem Almshouse,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed.
Seth Rockman (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003), 102-106.
15
Rockman, 2-4.
good thing that came out of the welfare reform was the public school system. The rest of the
ideas just cost money with very little benefits. The welfare reform did not do its job.
Bibliography
Brownson, Orestes A. “The Laboring Classes,” Documents to Accompany America’s History, ed.
Melvin Yazawa. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008, 249-250.
Henretta, James A. America: A Concise History, ed. James A. Henretta. Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin’s 2010.
Johnson, Paul E. “Religious Reform as a Form of Social Control,” Major Problems in American
History, ed. Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2007, 286296.
Rockman, Seth. Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth Rockman. Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin’s, 2003, 1-29.
“Rules and Regulations of the Salem Almshouse,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth
Rockman. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003, 102-106.
Skidmore, Thomas. “Rights of Man to Property,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth
Rockman. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003, 136-138.
“Subjects of the New York House of Refuge,” Welfare Reform in the Early Republic, ed. Seth
Rockman. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003, 85-91.