Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T23:36:32.459Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“THE LAW'S A BACHELOR”: OLIVER TWIST, BASTARDY, AND THE NEW POOR LAW

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2006

Susan Zlotnick
Susan Zlotnick
Affiliation:
Vassar College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

IN THE MELODRAMATIC FINAL MOMENTS of Charles Dickens's Oliver Twist, Bumble the ex-beadle is exposed for helping to obliterate Oliver's patrimony. When he attempts to shift the blame for his unlawful actions onto Mrs. Bumble, Mr. Brownlow will not allow such a move because, as Brownlow declares, “‘in the eye of the law’” the husband is the “‘more guilty of the two…for the law supposes that [his] wife acts under [his] direction’” (335; ch. 51). While a model of oppressive officialdom and petty tyranny in his public life, Bumble is no match for the termagant he has married; and the revelation of his private humiliation leads him to reply: “‘If that's the eye of the law, the law's a bachelor’” (335; ch. 51). It is easy to dismiss Bumble's assertion that the “law's a bachelor” as an instance of Dickensian wit, but this essay contends that Oliver Twist is a serious exploration of the “bachelor law.” Specifically, it explores one aspect of the New Poor Laws that did favor Britain's bachelors– the bastardy clause.

Type
Research Article
Information
Victorian Literature and Culture , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 131 - 146
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armstrong Nancy. 1987. Desire and Domestic Fiction: A Political History of the Novel. New York: Oxford UP
Bodenheimer Rosemarie. 1988. The Politics of Story in Victorian Social Fiction. Ithaca: Cornell UP
Bowen John. 2000. Other Dickens: Pickwick to Chuzzlewit. Oxford: Oxford UP
Boyer George. 1990. An Economic History of the English Poor Laws, 1750–1850. Cambridge: Cambridge UP
Clark Anna. (2000) “The New Poor Law and the Breadwinner Wage: Contrasting Assumptions.” Journal of Social History 34: 261– 81.Google Scholar
Clark Anna. 1986. “The Politics of Seduction in English Popular Culture, 1748–1848.” The Progress of Romance: The Politics of Popular Fiction. Ed. Jean Radford. London: Routledge, 47– 70.
Cody Lisa Forman. (2000) “The Politics of Illegitimacy in an Age of Reform: Women, Reproduction, and Political Economy in England's New Poor Law of 1834.” Journal of Women's History 11: 131– 56.Google Scholar
Cowherd Raymond. 1977. Political Economists and the English Poor Laws: A Historical Study of the Influence of Classical Economics on the Formation of Social Welfare Policy. Athens: Ohio UP,
Dickens Charles. 1982. Oliver Twist. Ed. Kathleen Tillotson. New York: Oxford UP
Fielding K. J. (1987) “Benthamite Utilitarianism and Oliver Twist: A Novel of Ideas.” Dickens Quarterly 4: 49– 65.Google Scholar
1974. Great Britain Poor Law Commissioners. The Poor Law Report of 1834. Ed. S. G. and E. O. A. Checkland. Harmondworth: Penguin
Hadley Elaine. 1995. Melodramatic Tactics: Theatricalized Dissent in the English Marketplace, 1800–1885. Stanford: Stanford UP
Henriques Ursula. 1967 “Bastardy and the New Poor Law.” Past and Present 37: 103– 29.Google Scholar
House Humphry. 1942. The Dickens World. London: Oxford UP
House Madeline, and Graham Storey. 1965. Vol. 1 of The Letters of Charles Dickens. 11 vols. Oxford: Clarendon,
Ignatieff Michael. 1983. “John Millar and Individualism.” Wealth and Virtue: The Shaping of Political Economy in the Scottish Enlightenment. Ed. Istvan Hont and Michael Ignatieff. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 317– 34.
John Juliet. 2001. Dickens's Villains: Melodrama, Character, Popular Culture. New York: Oxford UP
Kettle Arnold. 1951. An Introduction to the English Novel. 2 vols. London: Hutchinson Library Vol. 1.
Lees Lynn Hollen. 1998. The Solidarities of Strangers: The English Poor Laws and the People, 1700–1948. New York: Cambridge UP
Levine-Clark Marjorie. (2000) “Engendering Relief: Women, Ablebodiedness, and the New Poor Law in Early Victorian England.” Journal of Women's History 11: 107– 30.Google Scholar
Malthus Thomas Robert. 1992. An Essay on the Principle of Population. Ed. Donald Winch. Cambridge: Cambridge UP
Marcus Steven. 1965. Dickens: From Pickwick to Dombey. New York: Basic Books
Mayhew Henry. 1968. London Labour and London Poor. 4 vols. New York: Dover Vol. 4.
Rose Sonya. 1992. Limited Livelihoods: Gender and Class in Nineteenth-Century England. Berkeley: U of California P
Schlicke Paul. 1975 “Bumble and the Poor Law Satire of Oliver Twist.” The Dickensian 71: 149– 56.Google Scholar
Schor Hilary. 1999. Dickens and the Daughter of the House. New York: Cambridge UP
Senior Nassau. 1973. “Poor Law Reform.” Poverty in the Victorian Age. 4 Vols. Ed. A. W. Coats. Westmead: Gregg International, Vol. 2.
Stokes Peter. (2001) “Bentham, Dickens, and the Uses of the Workhouse.” SEL: Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900 41: 711– 27.Google Scholar
Valenze Deborah. 1984. The First Industrial Woman. New York: Oxford UP
Wahrman Dror. 1995. Imagining the Middle Class: The Political Representation of Class in Britain, c. 1780–1840. New York: Cambridge UP
Walkowitz Judith. 1980. Prostitution and Victorian Society: Women, Class, and the State. New York: Cambridge UP
Wolff Larry. (1996) “‘The Boys are Pickpockets, and the Girl is a Prostitute'’: Gender and Juvenile Criminality in Early Victorian England from Oliver Twist to London Labour.” New Literary History 27: 227– 49.Google Scholar
(1834). United Kingdom. Hansard Parliamentary Debates. 3rd ser. 24
(1834). United Kingdom. Hansard Parliamentary Debates. 3rd ser. 25