Biography
At first glance, Jonathan Tipple was a stereotypical workhouse master. A tough disciplinarian, workhouse order appeared to be his first and only priority. This agenda manifested itself in outbursts of extreme punishment including the beating of young William Holiday with little documented provocation.[1] This, in addition to the accusations that Tipple abused another pauper, Frances Tarless, tempts a modern observer to view Tipple through a historically typical lens.[2] It's easy to superimpose the dramatized accounts of cruel workhouse overseers such as those found in Oliver Twist and view him in the same vein as these literary villains.[3] In reality, Tipple’s workhouse life was relatively mundane. Between these outbursts of extreme punishment, the majority of Jonathan Tipple’s appearances in the workhouse logs involved ordering clothes for the paupers of the workhouse, a task that was neither violent nor exciting.[4] In addition, a handful of elderly paupers praised Tipple for his proper workhouse management and testified that Tarless had been the true source of the problem.[5] One group of people accused Tipple of abuse and another praised his good treatment, which calls into question the categorization of Tipple as a workhouse tyrant, and gives rise to an alternate narrative of a man caught between two opposing parties and their respective demands.
In his heart, Jonathan Tipple was thoroughly committed to improving the wellbeing of the paupers under his supervision. Given the fact that he was an adult male in 18th century England, he was likely Protestant or, at the very least, was familiar with Protestant ideals in relation to poor relief.[6] However, this desire to help the needy was overshadowed by the constant pressure to perform from the committee. This led to considerable discomfort for Tipple because his hidden transcript was at odds with the role he was expected to play.[7] He prioritized helping the paupers as best he could, but the power dynamics inherent to the workhouse environment meant that the paupers resented him and that the committee did not respect him.[8] Having to act subservient in one situation and dominant in another led to an emotional volatility that strained all of Tipple’s relationships. The need to act as a different person in different environments was what led to his mood swings and acts of violence. Caught in a loop not dissimilar to that of the fictional Dr. Jekyll, Tipple’s oscillations between beating the paupers and beseeching the committee to provide him with more funds indicates both how much he truly cares for the paupers and how unable he is to effectively help them.[9]
The story that emerges from this internal and external conflict is that of a man who woke up every morning wanting to do good but being tragically unable to do so in the way he saw fit. Every time Tipple tried to loosen the regulations on the paupers, individuals such as Tarless and Holiday would take advantage of him, forcing corrective action and worsening Tipple’s relationship with the people he sought to help. While slightly less nefarious, this narrative is no more uplifting than simply assuming that Tipple is an evil man. However, it is altogether more plausible than believing that his hatred of the poor could have sustained him during the time he was master of the workhouse. This alternate narrative provides Tipple with the agency to choose to help the poor based on his own religious convictions rather than blindly following the instincts of his flawed nature.
Sources:
Dickens, Charles, and Cruikshank, George. Oliver Twist. Hurd and Houghton, 1874.
Goffman, Erving. Asylums : Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. 1st ed. Anchor, A277. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1961.
Kadane, Matthew. "Original Sin and the Path to the Enlightenment." Past & Present, no. 235 (2017): 105-40.
Scott, James C. "Behind the Official Story." In Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts, 1. NEW HAVEN; LONDON: Yale University Press, 1990.
St Andrew Undershaft Workhouse Committee, “St Andrew Undershaft - Workhouse Minute Book 1780-1801,” Virtual Workhouse Digital Archive, accessed January 25, 2018, https://virtualworkhouse.carleton.edu.
Footnotes:
[1] “William Holiday aged 14 Years...complained that he had been beat by Mr. Tipple the Master of the Workhouse only for asking for his own Stockings” (Undershaft 194).
[2] Tipple had two alleged run ins with Tarless, once in November of 1797: “Frances Tarless complained that Mr. Tipple has used her ill and took her by force out of the room where she was” (Undershaft 207-8), and then again in July of 1800: “Frances Tarless complained that Mr. Tipple had stop’t giving her the allowance of bread” (Undershaft 258).
[3] Dickens’ use of sarcasm and hyperbole when describing the Beedle and council in charge of the workhouse has contributed to a cultural perception of the heads of institutions as being inherently evil. The iconic scene where Oliver is denied food and punished for being audacious enough to ask is more demonstrative of the failings of the workhouse as an institution than of the cruelty of actual workhouse overseers.
[4] Tipple’s most frequent appearances involve him buying clothes and distributing them to paupers as he sees fit (Undershaft 206, 218, 248-9, 261).
[5] “Five elderly paupers were then called in and not one of them could say that Mr. or Mrs. Tipple had used anyone in the house inappropriately and that Mrs. Tarless has behaved exceedingly ill” (Undershaft 258).
[6]In Matthew Kadane’s essay “Original Sin and the Path to Enlightenment” he stresses the shift away from a worldview that prevents human improvement and towards a more enlightened one that emphasizes people's ability to be changed for the better. As a subscriber to this ideology, Tipple likely felt that it was his moral duty to better the lives of the paupers.
[7]John C. Scott examines the idea of hidden and public transcripts in his work “Behind the Official Story”. He asserts that every person in a system of inequality, such at the relationship between the paupers and the workhouse master, has a predefined role to play. This role or “public transcript”(Scott 4) is constantly at odds with each individual's thoughts and feeling known as their “private transcript” (Scott 4). The difference between these transcripts creates a tension that Scott likens to a pressure buildup within a barrel. In Tipple’s case this pressure releases itself in outbursts of disciplinary action, venting his frustration at his inability to help the paupers and still please the committee through acts of violence.
[8] Goffman’s definition of a total institution references the stark divide between the supervisors and the inmates. This segregation results in inmates perceiving the supervisors as “condescending, highhanded, and mean,” whereas supervisors see the inmates as “bitter, secretive, and untrustworthy” (Goffman 7). These dynamics fully manifest themselves in the form of the paupers’ and the committee’s mutual resentment of one another and Tipple’s awkward position as a middleman.
[9] Tipple’s violent outbursts are infrequent yet prominent but he does have a kinder side as expressed in his requests for funds to be used to purchase additional clothing and food for the paupers at the St. Andrew Undershaft Workhouse (Undershaft 264, 269).
