Children in Brit Lit

National Society for the Education of Poor Children founded

On 16 October 1811, the National Society for the Education of Poor Children in the Principles of the Established Church (the Church of England) was founded to establish “National Schools.” According to their founders, poor children were to be taught to avoid vice and behave in an orderly manner within their station. To limit costs, the monitorial system was employed, by which more advanced pupils taught younger ones.

Related Articles

Florence S. Boos, “The Education Act of 1870: Before and After”

Factory Act

Act to Regulate the Labour of Children and Young Persons in the Mills and Factories of the United Kingdom passed on 29 August 1833. Image: the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Articles

Elsie B. Michie, "On the Sacramental Test Act, the Catholic Relief Act, the Slavery Abolition Act, and the Factory Act"

Related Articles

Peter Capuano, “On Sir Charles Bell’s The Hand, 1833″

Act on Custody of Infants

On 17 August 1839, passage of an Act to Amend the Law Relating to the Custody of Infants. The Act allowed a separated wife to petition the court for custody of her children under the age of seven. Image: The Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Related Articles

Rachel Ablow, “‘One Flesh,’ One Person, and the 1870 Married Women’s Property Act”

Kelly Hager, “Chipping Away at Coverture: The Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857″

Jill Rappoport, “Wives and Sons: Coverture, Primogeniture, and Married Women’s Property”

Elementary Education Act

In February 1870, passage of the Elementary Education Act Parliament provides for universal, nonsectarian education of British children at public expense and with public oversight. Image: The Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Related Articles

Herbert F. Tucker, "On Event"

Education Act of 1870

On 9 August 1870, the Education Act of 1870 (England), written by William Edward Forster, received the royal assent. The Act established local education boards empowered (but not required) to levy taxes to support the education of children ages 5-13 in “Board Schools,” for which fees could also be charged. It also permitted local boards to fund existing and future religious schools. Image: The Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Articles

Florence S. Boos, “The Education Act of 1870: Before and After”

Herbert F. Tucker, “In the Event of a Second Reform”

The Matrimonial Causes Act of 1878

In the eyes of English Law, women had little to no protective rights before the year 1850. Men could be as violent to their wives as they chose to be. As a result, the Matrimonial Causes act of 1878 was passed by British Parliament. It was implemented during an era of frequent “divorce related legislation” in England. The goal was to give women an opportunity to separate from their physically abusive husbands. The action was taken with hopes of closing legal “loopholes” to violence against women. Despite parliament’s good intentions, the act was ultimately ineffective in protecting women from marital violence. Many fictional stories were written as “mockeries” and critiques of the law’s ineffectiveness. The goal of these authors was to prove that women were still oppressed under the British patriarchy. They wanted to inspire more strict and vigorous legislation to protect married women. The main problem with the act was that British courts of law rarely worked to enforce it. Because of the law’s futility, it was largely discredited among British women. Many of them were de-incentivized from using it because they knew nobody would enforce the order. Once married, women were not allowed to make their own money. Since the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1878 didn’t guarantee divorce, this rule remained despite a woman’s restraining order. Nevertheless, financial support wasn’t always given to women who separated from their husbands. This led to many women being neglected by the British government even after they obtained restraining orders against their husbands. The act also failed to address female captivity at the hands of their husbands. In one instance, a woman left her husband in favor of living with family. Her husband took the case to court, where the judiciary ruled in his favor. At the time, it was legal in England for a husband to control the whereabouts of his wife. This possibility wasn’t even considered in the Matrimonial Clauses Act.

However, an historian named Lisa Surridge concluded that British journalists started covering domestic violence more after the act was passed. She also highlighted the role that novels and stories played in drawing awareness to the issue of domestic violence. In other words, British writers worked harder to end domestic violence than courts and parliamentary legislators. Charles Dickens is one example of an author that worked to expose marital injustice through his writing. In stories such as the Old Curiosity Shop and Oliver Twist, Dickens reveals his grievances and skepticism of marriage as an institution. Unfortunately, some advocates for the Matrimonial Causes Act used questionable strategies to ensure its passage. For example, Francis Power Cobbe (a prominent feminist author), tried to portray domestic violence as a “middle-class” issue. Surridge confirms that this elitist interpretation was dominant in British Parliament as well.

It was in the year 1878 that people started viewing physical violence towards women as torture. Francis Power Cobbe was a major advocate for this comparison. The works that she wrote on this subject played a big role in passing the Matrimonial Causes Act. Overall, the act (among others) represented a profound change in the British perception of marriage. It destroyed the notion that women had to stay with their husbands no matter what. Religious turmoil also contributed to “setting the stage” for divorce legislation. During periods of theocratic conflict, many people started questioning the Church of England. The divorce law is an example of something they questioned and criticized. This type of thinking helped prepare for future legislation. Under the act, women who separated from their husbands were eligible for financial support. It also ensured them custody of their children had they not committed adultery. However, financial aid for child care and marital separation was rarely granted under the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1878.

Ferguson, Trish. Tom Hardy's Legal Fictions . Edinburgh University Press, 2013. 

Bailey, Joanne. “English Marital Violence in Litigation, Literature, and the Press.” Journal of Women's History, vol. 19, no. 4, 2007, pp. 144–153., doi:10.1353/jowh.2007.0065. 

Qureshi , Shazia. “Reconceptualising Domestic Violence as 'Domestic Torture'.” Journal for Political Studies , 2013. 

Hager, Kelly. Dickens and the Rise of Divorce: the Failed-Marriage Plot and the Novel Tradition. Routlege, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. 

Gibson, Colin S. Dissolving Wedlock. New York, 1994. 

Image: https://www.historyextra.com/period/georgian/facts-history-parliament-h…

Nesbit's "The Play Times"

‪In December 1894, Nister's Holiday Annual‪ publishes the first installment of E. Nesbit's "The Play Times," the first appearance of material that would later be reworked as part of ‬The Story of the Treasure Seekers‪. The series was continued in the 1895 and 1896 volumes and contained the foundations for the chapter entitled "Being Editors."‬ Image: Photograph of Edith Nesbit. This image is in the public domain in the United States as its copyright has expired.

Articles

Claudia Nelson, “Mass Media Meets Children’s Literature, 1899: E. Nesbit’s The Story of the Treasure Seekers”

Story of the Treasure Seekers

‪In December 1899, ‬The Story of the Treasure Seekers‪ is published in book form by T. Fisher Unwin in the UK and Frederick Stokes in the US. The book, whose story is continued in ‬The Wouldbegoods‪ and ‬The New Treasure Seekers‪, establishes E. Nesbit as a successful writer for and about children.‬ Image: Photograph of Edith Nesbit. This image is in the public domain in the United States as its copyright has expired.

Articles

Claudia Nelson, “Mass Media Meets Children’s Literature, 1899: E. Nesbit’s The Story of the Treasure Seekers”