Editing Workhouse (section)

==Early Victorian workhouses==
{{multiple image
   | width1    = 240
   | footer    = [[Sampson Kempthorne]]'s cruciform design for a workhouse accommodating 300&nbsp;paupers
   | image1    = Sampson Kempthorne workhouse design for 300 paupers.jpg
   | alt1      = Design
   | caption1  = 
   | width2    = 150
   | image2    = Sampson Kempthorne workhouse design for 300 paupers, plan view.jpg
   | alt2      = Design
   | caption2  = 
  }}
[[File:Contrasted Residences for the Poor.jpg|right|thumb|''Contrasted Residences for the Poor'' (1836), by [[Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin|Augustus Pugin]]. He was critical of Kempthorne's octagonal design shown above.]]
The New Poor Law Commissioners were very critical of existing workhouses, and generally insisted that they be replaced.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=49|ps=none}} They complained in particular that "in by far the greater number of cases, it is a large almshouse, in which the young are trained in idleness, ignorance, and vice; the able-bodied maintained in sluggish sensual indolence; the aged and more respectable exposed to all the misery that is incident to dwelling in such a society".{{sfnp|May|1987|pp=122–123|ps=none}}

After 1835 many workhouses were constructed with the central buildings surrounded by work and exercise yards enclosed behind brick walls, so-called "pauper bastilles".  The commission proposed that all new workhouses should allow for the segregation of paupers into at least four distinct groups, each to be housed separately: the aged and impotent, children, able-bodied males, and able-bodied females.{{sfnp|May|1987|pp=122–123|ps=none}}  A common layout resembled [[Jeremy Bentham]]'s prison [[panopticon]], a radial design with four three-storey buildings at its centre set within a rectangular courtyard, the perimeter of which was defined by a three-storey entrance block and single-storey outbuildings, all enclosed by a wall. That basic layout, one of two designed by the architect [[Sampson Kempthorne]] (his other design was octagonal with a segmented interior, sometimes known as the Kempthorne star{{sfnp|May|2011|p=10|ps=none}}), allowed for four separate work and exercise yards, one for each class of inmate.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=49–52|ps=none}}  Separating the inmates was intended to serve three purposes: to direct treatment to those who most needed it; to deter others from pauperism; and as a physical barrier against illness, physical and mental.{{sfnp|Driver|2004|p=65|ps=none}}
The commissioners argued that buildings based on Kempthorne's plans would be symbolic of the recent changes to the provision of poor relief; one assistant commissioner expressed the view that they would be something "the pauper would feel it was utterly impossible to contend against", and "give confidence to the Poor Law Guardians".  Another assistant commissioner claimed the new design was intended as a "terror to the able-bodied population", but the architect [[George Gilbert Scott]] was critical of what he called "a set of ready-made designs of the meanest possible character".{{sfnp|Driver|2004|p=59|ps=none}}  Some critics of the new Poor Law noted the similarities between Kempthorne's plans and model prisons, and doubted that they were merely coincidental - [[Richard Oastler]] went as far as referring to the institutions as 'prisons for the poor'.<ref>Oastler, R. The Right of the Poor to Liberty and Life, Roake and Varty, 1838</ref> [[Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin|Augustus Pugin]] compared Kempthorne's octagonal plan with the "antient poor hoyse", in what Felix Driver calls a "romantic, conservative critique" of the "degeneration of English moral and aesthetic values".{{sfnp|Driver|2004|p=61|ps=none}}

By the 1840s some of the enthusiasm for Kempthorne's designs had waned.  With limited space in built-up areas, and concerns over the ventilation of buildings, some unions moved away from panopticon designs. Between 1840 and 1870 about 150 workhouses with separate blocks designed for specific functions were built.  Typically the entrance building contained offices, while the main workhouse building housed the various wards and workrooms, all linked by long corridors designed to improve ventilation and lighting.  Where possible, each building was separated by an exercise yard, for the use of a specific category of pauper.{{sfnp|Green|2010|pp=117–118|ps=none}}

=== Admission and discharge ===
[[File:Skiddaw Building, University of Cumbria - geograph.org.uk - 715574.jpg|left|thumb|The Carlisle Union Workhouse, opened in 1864, later part of the [[University of Cumbria]]]]
Each Poor Law Union employed one or more relieving officers, whose job it was to visit those applying for assistance and assess what relief, if any, they should be given. Any applicants considered to be in need of immediate assistance could be issued with a note admitting them directly to the workhouse. Alternatively they might be offered any necessary money or goods to tide them over until the next meeting of the guardians, who would decide on the appropriate level of support and whether or not the applicants should be assigned to the workhouse.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=202–203|ps=none}}
[[File:Workhouse shoes.jpg|thumb|Children's boots issued by [[Thackray Museum of Medicine|Leeds Union Workhouse]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=717.016 {{!}} Collections Online |url=https://collections.thackraymuseum.co.uk/object-717-016 |access-date=2024-05-30 |website=collections.thackraymuseum.co.uk}}</ref>]]
Workhouses were designed with only a single entrance guarded by a porter, through which inmates and visitors alike had to pass. Near to the entrance were the casual wards for tramps and vagrants{{efn|The [[Metropolitan Houseless Poor Act 1864]] imposed a legal obligation on Poor Law Unions to provide such temporary accommodation.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2012|loc=Art|ps=none}}}} and the relieving rooms, where paupers were housed until they had been examined by a medical officer.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}} After being assessed the paupers were separated and allocated to the appropriate ward for their category: boys under 14, able-bodied men between 14 and 60, men over 60, girls under 14, able-bodied women between 14 and 60, and women over 60.{{efn|Those were the official categories, but some Poor Law Unions further subdivided those in their care, particularly women: prostitutes, "women incapable of getting their own way from syphilis", and "idiotic or weak-minded women with one or more bastard children".{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}}}} Children under the age of two were allowed to remain with their mothers,{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}} but by entering a workhouse paupers were considered to have forfeited responsibility for their families.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}} Clothing and personal possessions (with the possible exception of [[spectacles]]) were usually taken from them and stored, to be returned on their discharge.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}} After bathing,{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=59|ps=none}} they were issued with a distinctive uniform:{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}}{{efn|The notion of marking out those in receipt of poor relief by their clothing was enshrined in law by the [[Poor Act 1697]], although the custom dated back to at least the previous century. The 1697 Act required paupers to wear a badge consisting of the letter "P" on their right shoulder, in either red or blue cloth.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2012|loc=Badging the Poor|ps=none}}}} for men it might be a striped cotton shirt, jacket and trousers, and a cloth cap, and for women a blue-and-white striped dress worn underneath a smock. Shoes were also provided.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}}  In some establishments certain categories of inmate were marked out by their clothing; for example, at [[Bristol Corporation of the Poor|Bristol Incorporation]] workhouse, prostitutes were required to wear a yellow dress and pregnant single women a red dress; such practices were deprecated by the Poor Law Commission in a directive issued in 1839 entitled "Ignominious Dress for Unchaste Women in Workhouses", but they continued until at least 1866.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2012|p=2208|ps=none}} Some workhouses had a separate "foul" or "itch" ward, where inmates diagnosed with skin diseases such as [[scabies]] could be detained before entering the workhouse proper.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}} Also not to be overlooked were unfortunate destitute sufferers of mental health disorders, who would be ordered to enter the workhouse by the parish doctor. The [[Lunacy Act 1853]] did promote the asylum as the institution of choice for patients afflicted with all forms of mental illness. However, in reality, destitute people suffering from mental illness would be housed in their local workhouse.<ref>Caldicott, Rosemary L. (2017). ''The Life and Death of Hannah Wiltshire" A Case Study of Bedminster Union Workhouse and Victorian Social Attitudes on Epilepsy''. Tangent Books.</ref>

[[File:Former workhouse in Kensington, London.jpg|thumb|[[Kensington]] workhouse in London, which later became part of [[St Mary Abbots Hospital]]|left]]
Conditions in the casual wards were worse than in the relieving rooms, and deliberately designed to discourage vagrants, who were considered potential troublemakers and probably disease-ridden.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=57|ps=none}} Vagrants who presented themselves at the door of a workhouse were at the mercy of the porter, whose decision it was whether or not to allocate them a bed for the night in the casual ward.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=160–161|ps=none}} Those refused entry risked being sentenced to two weeks of [[penal labour|hard labour]] if they were found begging or sleeping in the open and prosecuted for an offence under the [[Vagrancy Act 1824]].{{sfnp|Higgs|2007|p=87|ps=none}}

A typical early 19th-century casual ward was a single large room furnished with some kind of bedding and perhaps a bucket in the middle of the floor for sanitation. The bedding on offer could be very basic: the Poor Law authorities in [[Richmond, London|Richmond]] in London in the mid-1840s provided only straw and rags, although beds were available for the sick.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=190|ps=none}} In return for their night's accommodation vagrants might be expected to undertake a certain amount of work before leaving the next day; for instance at [[Guisborough]] men were required to break stones for three hours and women to pick oakum, two hours before breakfast and one after.<ref>{{cite web |last=Higginbotham |first=Peter |title=The Workhouse in Guisborough, Yorkshire, N. Riding |url=http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Guisborough/ |publisher=workhouses.org.uk |access-date=15 October 2011}}</ref> Until the passage of the [[Casual Poor Act 1882]] vagrants could discharge themselves before 11 am on the day following their admission, but from 1883 onwards they were required to be detained until 9 am on the second day. Those who were admitted to the workhouse again within one month were required to be detained until the fourth day after their admission.{{sfnp|Higgs|2007|p=94|ps=none}}
[[File:Leeds workhouse casual wards.jpg|thumb|177x177px|Entrance to casual wards of Leeds Union Workhouse, built in 1901]]
Inmates were free to leave whenever they wished after giving reasonable notice, generally considered to be three hours, but if a parent discharged him- or herself then the children were also discharged, to prevent them from being abandoned.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=130|ps=none}} The comic actor [[Charlie Chaplin]], who spent some time with his mother in [[Lambeth]] workhouse, records in his autobiography that when he and his half-brother returned to the workhouse after having been sent to a school in [[Hanwell]], he was met at the gate by his mother Hannah, dressed in her own clothes. Desperate to see them again she had discharged herself and the children; they spent the day together playing in [[Kennington Park]] and visiting a coffee shop, after which she readmitted them all to the workhouse.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=130–131|ps=none}}

Available data surrounding death rates within the workhouse system is minimal; however, in the [[Wall to Wall Media|Wall to Wall]] documentary ''Secrets from the Workhouse'', it is estimated that 10% of those admitted to the workhouse after the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act died within the system.<ref>Secrets from the workhouse, Television Documentary, Wall to Wall television, Southwell, 2013.</ref>

===Work===
{|class=wikitable style="margin: 0 1em 1em 1em; border: 1px solid #8888aa; background: #f7f8ff; width:20%;" align=right cellpadding=2 cellspacing=0
! style="padding: 0 5px 0 5px; background:#ccccff;" align="center" colspan="2"| Daily workhouse schedule{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}}<br />
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #fff;" align="left"
| 5:00-6:00
| Rise
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #ececec;"
| 6:30–7:00
| Breakfast
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #fff;" align="left"
| 7:00–12:00
| Work
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #ececec;" align="left"
| 12:00–13:00
| Dinner
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #fff;" align="left"
| 13:00–18:00
| Work
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #ececec;"
| 18:00–19:00
| Supper
|- style="font-size: 90%; background: #fff;" align="left"
| 20:00
| Bedtime
|-
|colspan="2" style="color:black;text-align:center;"|<small>Sunday was a day of rest. During the winter months inmates were allowed to rise an hour later and did not start work until 8:00.</small>{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}}
|}
Some Poor Law authorities hoped that payment for the work undertaken by the inmates would produce a profit for their workhouses, or at least allow them to be self-supporting, but whatever small income could be produced never matched the running costs.{{sfnp|Crowther|1981|p=27|ps=none}} In the 18th century, inmates were poorly managed, and lacked either the inclination or the skills to compete effectively with free market industries such as spinning and weaving. Some workhouses operated not as places of employment, but as houses of correction, a role similar to that trialled by Buckinghamshire magistrate [[Matthew Marryott]]. Between 1714 and 1722 he experimented with using the workhouse as a test of poverty rather than a source of profit, leading to the establishment of a large number of workhouses for that purpose.{{sfnp|Poynter|1969|pp=15–16|ps=none}} Nevertheless, local people became concerned about the competition to their businesses from cheap workhouse labour.{{sfnp|Crowther|1981|p=27|ps=none}} As late as 1888, for instance, the Firewood Cutters Protection Association was complaining that the livelihood of its members was being threatened by the cheap firewood on offer from the workhouses in the East End of London.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=110|ps=none}}

Many inmates were allocated tasks in the workhouse such as caring for the sick or teaching that were beyond their capabilities, but most were employed on "generally pointless" work,{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=111|ps=none}} such as breaking stones or removing the [[hemp]] from telegraph wires. Workhouses were sometimes colloquially known as 'The Spike', which may derive from the common task of picking [[oakum]] using a large metal nail, also known as a spike.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=111|ps=none}} Bone-crushing, useful in the creation of [[fertiliser]], was a task most inmates could perform,{{sfnp|Nicholls|1854|p=394|ps=none}} until a government inquiry into conditions in the [[Andover workhouse scandal|Andover workhouse]] in 1845 found that starving paupers were reduced to fighting over the rotting bones they were supposed to be grinding, to suck out the marrow.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=8–9|ps=none}} The resulting scandal led to the withdrawal of bone-crushing as an employment in workhouses and the replacement of the Poor Law Commission by the [[Poor Law Board]] in 1847.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}} Conditions were thereafter regulated by a list of rules contained in the 1847 [[Consolidated General Order]], which included guidance on issues such as diet, staff duties, dress, education, discipline, and redress of grievances.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=130|ps=none}}

Some Poor Law Unions opted to send destitute children to the British colonies, in particular to [[Canada]] and [[Australia]], where it was hoped the fruits of their labour would contribute to the defence of the empire and enable the colonies to buy more British exports. Known as [[Home Children]], the [[Philanthropic Society#Philanthropic Farm School|Philanthropic Farm school]] alone sent more than 1000 boys to the colonies between 1850 and 1871, many of them taken from workhouses. In 1869 [[Maria Rye]] and [[Annie Macpherson]], "two spinster ladies of strong resolve", began taking groups of orphans and children from workhouses to Canada, most of whom were taken in by farming families in [[Ontario]]. The Canadian government paid a small fee to the ladies for each child delivered, but most of the cost was met by charities or the Poor Law Unions.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=147|ps=none}}

As far as possible, elderly inmates were expected to undertake the same kind of work as the younger men and women, although concessions were made to their relative frailty. Or they might be required to chop firewood, clean the wards, or carry out other domestic tasks.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=174|ps=none}} In 1882 Lady Brabazon, later the [[Countess of Meath]], set up a project to provide alternative occupation for non-able-bodied inmates, known as the [[Brabazon scheme]].{{sfnp|Higgs|2007|p=63|ps=none}} Volunteers provided training in crafts such as knitting, embroidery and lace making, all costs initially being borne by Lady Brabazon herself. Although slow to take off, when workhouses discovered that the goods being produced were saleable and could make the enterprise self-financing, the scheme gradually spread across the country, and by 1897 there were more than 100 branches.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2012|loc=Brabazon scheme|ps=none}}

===Diet===
[[File:Women mealtime st pancras workhouse.jpg|thumb|left|Dinnertime at St Pancras Workhouse, London, 1911]]
In 1836 the Poor Law Commission distributed six diets for workhouse inmates, one of which was to be chosen by each Poor Law Union depending on its local circumstances.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}}  Although dreary, the food was generally nutritionally adequate,<ref name=BMJ/> and according to contemporary records was prepared with great care.  Issues such as training staff to serve and weigh portions were well understood.<ref name=BMJ>{{citation |last1=Smith |first1=L. |last2=Thornton |first2=S. J. |last3=Reinarz |first3=J |last4=Williams |first4=A. N. |title=Please, sir, I want some more |journal=British Medical Journal |date=17 December 2008 |volume=337 |pages=1450–1451 |url=http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/337/dec17_2/a2722?ijkey=e0a439d249acf09b97084e2c6ea8228770a3a873&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha |doi=10.1136/bmj.a2722 |pmid=19091756 |s2cid=31457463 |access-date=2 December 2010|url-access=subscription }}</ref>  The diets included general guidance, as well as schedules for each class of inmate.  They were laid out on a weekly rotation, the various meals selected on a daily basis, from a list of foodstuffs.  For instance, a breakfast of bread and [[gruel]] was followed by dinner, which might consist of cooked meats, pickled pork or bacon with vegetables, potatoes, yeast [[dumpling]], soup and [[suet]], or [[rice pudding]].  Supper was normally bread, cheese and [[broth]], and sometimes butter or potatoes.{{sfnp|Anon|1836|pp=56–59|ps=none}}

The larger workhouses had separate dining rooms for males and females; workhouses without separate dining rooms would stagger the meal times to avoid any contact between the sexes.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=62|ps=none}}

===Education===
[[File:Children at crumpsall workhouse circa 1895.jpg|thumb|A group of children at [[Crumpsall]] Workhouse, 1895–97]]
Education was provided for the children,{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}} but workhouse teachers were a particular problem. Poorly paid, without any formal training, and facing large classes of unruly children with little or no interest in their lessons, few stayed in the job for more than a few months.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=134–135|ps=none}} In an effort to force workhouses to offer at least a basic level of education, legislation was passed in 1845 requiring that all pauper apprentices should be able to read and sign their own [[indenture]] papers.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=135|ps=none}} A training college for workhouse teachers was set up at [[Kneller Hall]] in [[Twickenham]] during the 1840s, but it closed in the following decade.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=134|ps=none}}

Some children were trained in skills valuable to the area.  In [[Shrewsbury]], the boys were placed in the workhouse's workshop, while girls were tasked with [[Spinning (textiles)|spinning]], making gloves and other jobs "suited to their sex, their ages and abilities".  At [[St Martin in the Fields]], children were trained in spinning [[flax]], picking hair and [[carding]] wool, before being placed as apprentices.  Workhouses also had links with local industry; in [[Nottingham]], children employed in a cotton mill earned about £60 a year for the workhouse.  Some parishes advertised for apprenticeships, and were willing to pay any employer prepared to offer them.  Such agreements were preferable to supporting children in the workhouse: apprenticed children were not subject to inspection by justices, thereby lowering the chance of punishment for neglect; and apprenticeships were viewed as a better long-term method of teaching skills to children who might otherwise be uninterested in work.  Supporting an apprenticed child was also considerably cheaper than the workhouse or outdoor relief.{{sfnp|Honeyman|2007|pp=21–23|ps=none}}  Children often had no say in the matter, which could be arranged without the permission or knowledge of their parents.{{sfnp|Higginbotham|2006|p=19|ps=none}}  The supply of labour from workhouse to factory, which remained popular until the 1830s, was sometimes viewed as a form of [[penal transportation|transportation]].  While getting parish apprentices from [[Clerkenwell]], [[Samuel Oldknow]]'s agent reported how some parents came "crying to beg they may have their Children out again".  Historian Arthur Redford suggests that the poor may have once shunned factories as "an insidious sort of workhouse".{{sfnp|Redford|1976|pp=24–25|ps=none}}

===Religion===
{{Quote box |width=25em|quoted=true |salign=center |quote=From the Jewish point of view&nbsp;... was the virtual impossibility of complying with the Jewish ritual requirements; the dietary laws could have been followed, if at all, only by virtual restriction to bread and water, and the observance of the Sabbath and Festivities was impossible.{{sfnp|Jones|1980|p=90|ps=none}}}}
Religion played an important part in workhouse life: prayers were read to the paupers before breakfast and after supper each day.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=66|ps=none}} Each Poor Law Union was required to appoint a chaplain to look after the spiritual needs of the workhouse inmates, and he was invariably expected to be from the established [[Church of England]]. Religious services were generally held in the dining hall, as few early workhouses had a separate chapel but in some parts of the country, notably [[Cornwall]] and [[northern England]],<ref name=HigginbothamReligion>{{cite web |last=Higginbotham |first=Peter |title=Religion in Workhouses |url=http://www.workhouses.org.uk/religion/ |publisher=workhouses.org.uk |access-date=21 October 2011}}</ref> there were more [[dissenter]]s than members of the established church. As section 19 of the 1834 Poor Law specifically forbade any regulation forcing an inmate to attend church services "in a Mode contrary to [their] Religious Principles",{{sfnp|Levinson|2004|p=666|ps=none}} the commissioners were reluctantly forced to allow non-Anglicans to leave the workhouse on Sundays to attend services elsewhere, so long as they were able to provide a certificate of attendance signed by the officiating minister on their return.<ref name=HigginbothamReligion/>

As the 19th century wore on [[Nonconformist (Protestantism)|non-conformist]] ministers increasingly began to conduct services within the workhouse, but [[Catholic]] priests were rarely welcomed.<ref name=HigginbothamReligion/> A variety of legislation had been introduced during the 17th century to limit the civil rights of Catholics, beginning with the [[Popish Recusants Act 1605]] in the wake of the failed [[Gunpowder Plot]] that year. Though almost all restrictions on Catholics in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland were removed by the [[Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829]], a great deal of anti-Catholic feeling remained.{{sfnp|Crowther|1981|p=130|ps=none}} Even in areas with large Catholic populations, such as [[Liverpool]], the appointment of a Catholic chaplain was unthinkable.<ref name=HigginbothamReligion/> Some guardians went so far as to refuse Catholic priests entry to the workhouse.{{sfnp|Crowther|1981|p=130|ps=none}}

===Discipline===
Discipline was strictly enforced in the workhouse; for minor offences such as swearing or feigning sickness the "disorderly" could have their diet restricted for up to 48&nbsp;hours. For more serious offences such as insubordination or violent behavior the "refractory" could be confined for up to 24&nbsp;hours, and might also have their diet restricted. Girls were punished in the same way as adults but sometimes in older cases girls were also beaten or slapped, but boys under the age of 14 could be beaten with "a rod or other instrument, such as may have been approved of by the Guardians". Children, specifically orphans, who leave the grounds without being discharged or run away from workhouses could be severely disciplined and could be confined with no food or water. The persistently refractory, or anyone bringing "spirituous or fermented liquor" into the workhouse, could be taken before a [[Justice of the Peace]] and even gaoled.<ref>{{cite web |title=Instructional Letter Accompanying the Consolidated General Order |url=http://www.workhouses.org.uk/gco/gco1847.shtml |publisher=workhouses.org.uk |access-date=14 October 2011}}</ref> All punishments handed out were recorded in a punishment book, which was examined regularly by the workhouse guardians, locally elected representatives of the participating parishes with overall responsibility for the running of the workhouse.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=135|ps=none}}

===Management and staffing===
[[File:Ripon workhouse.jpg|thumb|right|Ripon Union Workhouse, completed in 1855, replaced an earlier [[Georgian era]] workhouse.  It now houses a museum.<ref>{{cite web |title=About the Museum |url=http://riponmuseums.co.uk/museums/workhouse_museum_gardens |publisher=riponmuseums.co.uk |access-date=2 October 2011}}</ref>]]
Although the commissioners were responsible for the regulatory framework within which the Poor Law Unions operated,<!-- http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/bsurface_01.shtml if a (weak) cite is needed --> each union was run by a locally elected board of guardians, comprising representatives from each of the participating parishes, assisted by six ''[[List of Latin phrases (E)#ex officio|ex officio]]{{Broken anchor|date=2024-10-11|bot=User:Cewbot/log/20201008/configuration|target_link=List of Latin phrases (E)#ex officio|reason=Anchor "List of Latin phrases (E)#ex officio" links to a specific web page: "Ex officio". The anchor (ex officio) [[Special:Diff/648931353|has been deleted]].}}'' members.<ref name=NationalArchives>{{cite web |title=Poor Law records 1834–1871 |url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/poor-law-records.htm#18726 |publisher=The National Archives |access-date=3 December 2010}}</ref> The guardians were usually farmers or tradesmen,{{sfnp|May|2011|p=14|ps=none}} and as one of their roles was the contracting out of the supply of goods to the workhouse, the position could prove lucrative for them and their friends. Simon Fowler has commented that "it is clear that this [the awarding of contracts] involved much petty corruption, and it was indeed endemic throughout the Poor Law system".{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=33|ps=none}}

Although the 1834 Act allowed for women to become workhouse guardians provided they met the property requirement, the first female was not elected until 1875. [[Working class]] guardians were not appointed until 1892, when the property requirement was dropped in favour of occupying rented premises worth £5 a year.{{sfnp|May|2011|p=14|ps=none}}

Every workhouse had a complement of full-time staff, often referred to as the indoor staff. At their head was the governor or master, who was appointed by the board of guardians. His duties were laid out in a series of orders issued by the Poor Law Commissioners. As well as the overall administration of the workhouse, masters were required to discipline the paupers as necessary and to visit each ward twice daily, at 11 am and 9 pm. Female inmates and children under seven were the responsibility of the matron, as was the general housekeeping.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=75–76|ps=none}} The master and the matron were usually a married couple, charged with running the workhouse "at the minimum cost and maximum efficiency&nbsp;– for the lowest possible wages".{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=77|ps=none}}

A large workhouse such as [[Whitechapel]], accommodating several thousand paupers, employed a staff of almost 200; the smallest may only have had a porter and perhaps an assistant nurse in addition to the master and matron.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|p=75|ps=none}} A typical workhouse accommodating 225 inmates had a staff of five, which included a part-time chaplain and a part-time medical officer.{{sfnp|Crowther|1981|p=127|ps=none}} The low pay meant that many medical officers were young and inexperienced. To add to their difficulties, in most unions they were obliged to pay out of their own pockets for any drugs, dressings or other medical supplies needed to treat their patients.{{sfnp|Fowler|2007|pp=155–156|ps=none}}