Kids Go Free
Louth Museum

Ruth's Blog

Passive resistance in Louth 

by Ruth Gatenby

Auction of household items

Auction of household items

Poster

Poster

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Conservative government brought in an education act which for the first time properly funded state education, but it encouraged Anglican clergy to continue to go into state schools and give religious instruction to the children.  This teaching was not general religious knowledge, but Anglican doctrine.  Many Nonconformists strongly resented paying rates or local taxes to finance church schools, and there were fierce arguments, particularly from Liberals, including the MP for Louth, Robert Perks.

In Louth, many Methodists chose to send their children to the Methodist school.  (It was in Newmarket, and later became the theatre, a strange-shaped building!)  This school was funded by the members of the Methodist Church, not by the Government.

Along with many thousands up and down the country, Nonconformists in Louth refused to pay the percentage of the local taxes allocated to education and described what they were doing as ‘Passive Resistance’.

Some passive resistors transferred all their money to family or close friends so they could claim that they were unable to pay the education tax.  In this case the police had to seize goods to the value of the taxed owed, and then to sell these goods.  The 1903 poster announces an auction of a photograph, a flute, a clock and a carpet seized in this way, to be held in Louth Town Hall.

The people in the photo had gathered to auction their own belongings in order to pay the education tax.  This was a symbolic auction aimed at attracting attention to their cause.  It is thought that friends purchased the items so that the owners could have them back!

As time went on, feelings calmed down, and local authorities brought together interested parties - teachers, councillors and clergy - to create a voluntary agreement known as the ‘Agreed Syllabus’.  The 1944 Education Reform Act gave statutory force to this model.

I am grateful to Richard Gurnham for his comments.