The big story In 1886, Charles Booth published the ‘The Life and Labour of the People’, following his detailed survey of the lives of the poor in London. It revealed that 30% of Londoners lived in poverty. This was a shocking report, but many people believed London was not typical of Britain as a whole. York was then, as now, a small city with a mixed economy. Seebohm Rowntree, a Quaker and member of the chocolate company family, decided to undertake a similar survey in York. Rowntree carefully calculated a minimum weekly sum of money 'necessary to enable families to secure the necessities of a healthy life'. He deliberately made this sum the lowest level experts advised, so that no one would be able to pretend that the sum was not the border of real poverty. People whose income fell below this sum were defined as poor. This is known as absolute poverty. More... In 1886, Charles Booth published the ‘The Life and Labour of the People’, following his detailed survey of the lives of the poor in London. It revealed that 30% of Londoners lived in poverty. This was a shocking report, but many people believed London was not typical of Britain as a whole. York was then, as now, a small city with a mixed economy. Seebohm Rowntree, a Quaker and member of the chocolate company family, decided to undertake a similar survey in York. Rowntree carefully calculated a minimum weekly sum of money 'necessary to enable families to secure the necessities of a healthy life'. He deliberately made this sum the lowest level experts advised, so that no one would be able to pretend that the sum was not the border of real poverty. People whose income fell below this sum were defined as poor. This is known as absolute poverty. More... He and his assistants studied in detail the lives of over 46 000 York people, over two-thirds of the population. Anyone who could afford to employ a domestic servant was not included in the survey. In 1899 the results of the survey were published in ‘Poverty; a Study in Town Life.’ The results shocked the nation. Rowntree found that over 20 000 people in York were living in a state of poverty. That is, almost 28% did not have enough food, fuel and clothing to keep them in good health. Since this was almost half of York's entire working-class population, there could be no question that London was an exceptional case, or that there was not still a huge problem of poverty in Britain. More... Of those in poverty in York, about a third did not have enough money coming in each week to live a normal, healthy life even if they spent every penny wisely (Rowntree called this 'primary poverty'). Traditional Victorian 'remedies' like thrift were of no use to these people. You could not be expected to save money when you did not have enough for basic essentials. Rowntree found two main reasons for primary poverty. In 25% of cases, the chief wage-earner of the family was dead or unable to work, due to age disability of unemployment. However, in over 50% of the families in primary poverty, the breadwinner was in regular work. His wages were simply too low to meet his family's needs. Unskilled labourers earned roughly 90-100 pence a week in York in 1899, yet Rowntree estimated that at least 120 pence was needed to keep a family with three children out of poverty. The belief that a man could provide for his family if he was thrifty and hard-working, was shown to be false. However hard he tried, he could not keep out of poverty if he was seriously underpaid. More... The remaining two-thirds had enough income to give them the bare necessities, but they spent some portion of it unwisely. As a result, they were forced to go short on food and/or clothing (Rowntree called this 'secondary poverty'). ‘Spending unwisely’ sounds very judgemental and as though all of this group were spending money in the pub. Maybe some were, but the definition also included just posting a letter or taking a bus journey. Booth and Rowntree’s reports helped to bring about the Liberal reforms of 1906-1912. These included the provision of free school meals, sickness and unemployment insurance for working men and the first state pensions. Rowntree conducted two further studies of York, in 1936 and 1950. They revealed a steady reduction in the extent of poverty. By 1950 only 1.5% of the population of York lived in absolute poverty. From 1942, the Welfare State had been introduced, aiming to provide freedom from squalor, ignorance, want, idleness and disease. There was an increase in council house building, the NHS was founded and, for the first time, everyone was entitled to an old age pension and benefits if sick or unemployed. More... In the UK today we measure relative, rather than, absolute poverty. This defines people as poor if they lack the resources to afford what is generally considered to be an acceptable standard of living and a reasonable style of life. Summary of key points Rowntree’s survey shocked the nation by showing that even in a small city like York, 28% of people lived in poverty. No one could claim that it was poor people’s fault that they were poor. Rowntree’s survey persuaded governments to help the poor at the start of the 20th century, and changed attitudes to poverty forever. Back to the top
The big story In 1886, Charles Booth published the ‘The Life and Labour of the People’, following his detailed survey of the lives of the poor in London. It revealed that 30% of Londoners lived in poverty. This was a shocking report, but many people believed London was not typical of Britain as a whole.
York was then, as now, a small city with a mixed economy. Seebohm Rowntree, a Quaker and member of the chocolate company family, decided to undertake a similar survey in York.
Rowntree carefully calculated a minimum weekly sum of money 'necessary to enable families to secure the necessities of a healthy life'. He deliberately made this sum the lowest level experts advised, so that no one would be able to pretend that the sum was not the border of real poverty. People whose income fell below this sum were defined as poor. This is known as absolute poverty. More...
In 1886, Charles Booth published the ‘The Life and Labour of the People’, following his detailed survey of the lives of the poor in London. It revealed that 30% of Londoners lived in poverty. This was a shocking report, but many people believed London was not typical of Britain as a whole.
He and his assistants studied in detail the lives of over 46 000 York people, over two-thirds of the population. Anyone who could afford to employ a domestic servant was not included in the survey. In 1899 the results of the survey were published in ‘Poverty; a Study in Town Life.’ The results shocked the nation.
Rowntree found that over 20 000 people in York were living in a state of poverty. That is, almost 28% did not have enough food, fuel and clothing to keep them in good health. Since this was almost half of York's entire working-class population, there could be no question that London was an exceptional case, or that there was not still a huge problem of poverty in Britain. More...
Of those in poverty in York, about a third did not have enough money coming in each week to live a normal, healthy life even if they spent every penny wisely (Rowntree called this 'primary poverty'). Traditional Victorian 'remedies' like thrift were of no use to these people. You could not be expected to save money when you did not have enough for basic essentials.
Rowntree found two main reasons for primary poverty. In 25% of cases, the chief wage-earner of the family was dead or unable to work, due to age disability of unemployment. However, in over 50% of the families in primary poverty, the breadwinner was in regular work. His wages were simply too low to meet his family's needs. Unskilled labourers earned roughly 90-100 pence a week in York in 1899, yet Rowntree estimated that at least 120 pence was needed to keep a family with three children out of poverty. The belief that a man could provide for his family if he was thrifty and hard-working, was shown to be false. However hard he tried, he could not keep out of poverty if he was seriously underpaid. More...
The remaining two-thirds had enough income to give them the bare necessities, but they spent some portion of it unwisely. As a result, they were forced to go short on food and/or clothing (Rowntree called this 'secondary poverty'). ‘Spending unwisely’ sounds very judgemental and as though all of this group were spending money in the pub. Maybe some were, but the definition also included just posting a letter or taking a bus journey.
Booth and Rowntree’s reports helped to bring about the Liberal reforms of 1906-1912. These included the provision of free school meals, sickness and unemployment insurance for working men and the first state pensions.
Rowntree conducted two further studies of York, in 1936 and 1950. They revealed a steady reduction in the extent of poverty. By 1950 only 1.5% of the population of York lived in absolute poverty. From 1942, the Welfare State had been introduced, aiming to provide freedom from squalor, ignorance, want, idleness and disease. There was an increase in council house building, the NHS was founded and, for the first time, everyone was entitled to an old age pension and benefits if sick or unemployed. More...
In the UK today we measure relative, rather than, absolute poverty. This defines people as poor if they lack the resources to afford what is generally considered to be an acceptable standard of living and a reasonable style of life.
Summary of key points
Back to the top