Background
-wealthy, serious minded entrepreneur
-social conscience drove him to investigate the nature of poverty in London
-35 co-workers over 17 years to undertake a detailed study of the poor in London
-moved the debate forward as his findings showed that poor were in distress due to circumstances beyond their own control
-poverty was not the fault of the poor
-did not blame the capitalist system

Key Findings
-shows that 30% of London's population was living in poverty
-shocking stat that was taken up by reformers as an indication to the scale of the problem
-showed that poverty was a consequence of circumstance as well as individual fault
-poverty caused by problems relating to employment
-did not fully abandon the idea of individual responsiblity

Impact
-by revealing that 30% of London's population was living in poverty, he had a profound impact on the debate about poverty and welfare
-indicated that poverty was caused by economic circumstance more than individual failure

Classes
-Booth and his team divided the population into classes from A to H
-Class A consisted of 0.9% of the population (semi criminals)
-Class B consisted of 7% of the population
-Class E and F consisted of 51% (people in regular employment)
-Class G and H were only 17% (upper and middle class)

Criticism
-Helen Bosanquet attacked the statistical basis of the investigation
-stated it underestimated the sources of income available to poor families
-Bosanquet believed that Booth overestimated the extent of poverty
-Booths findings consisted only on primary research

Key Findings
-3 surveys of poverty in York
-provided statistical info that supported the work of Booth
-aim to find out the number of people in poverty and the nature of their poverty
-full-time investigator that did house to house visits
-11,000 houses visited, info from 46,000 people (2/3 of York)
-found that 28% of the population were in obvious need and living in poverty
-worked out the minimum wage necessary was 21 shillings 8d a week for a family of 5

Poverty Line
-28% of York lived in poverty, so he was able to create a Poverty Line
-demonstrated that 10% of the York population lived below this line, with no way they would ever make ends meet
-18% were living in secondary poverty (had the necessities to life)

Poverty Cycle
-death of the main wage earner, trade decline, child illness could through a family into primary poverty

1. Childhood was a time of poverty
2. conditions improve when the children become wage earners
3. improvement continued into early marriage
4. when children born, the couple slips below poverty line
5. remain here until children become wage earners
6. couples fall below the poverty line when they are old

Background
-Rowntree was a devoted Quaker (seek for God's advice)
-his religious nature dominated his attitude to society and his own workforce
-he believed that healthy, contented workers were the most efficient workers
-championed democracy in the workplace
-set minimum wages, family allowances and old age pensions

Impact
-described the nature of poverty- primary and secondary
-suppoted Booth's findings 30% and 28% in London and York were very similar
-showed that poverty was a national issue
-demonstrated the cause of poverty were circumstances such as low wages, beyond the control of the individual
-state should provide for those in need
-findings influential for the formation of the Liberal Party and Welfare Policy

When
-formed in 1884 by a group of left-wing intellectuals

Aim/beliefs
-wanted to reconstruct society in accordance with the highest moral principles
-wanted to have a citizen army replace the professional one (controversial)
-lobbied for a minimum wage
-1911 lobbied for a universal health prganisation
-promotion of socialist ideas
-Fabians supported the Boer War
-advance national and international socialism in a gradual, non-confronting way

Members
-early members included Sidney and Beatrice Webb (involved in the Royal Commission Reports), Emmeline Pankhurst and others