Accounting and the moral economy of illness in Victorian England: the Newcastle Infirmary

Andy Holden (Newcastle University Business School, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK)
Warwick Funnell (Kent Business School, Canterbury, UK University of Wollongong, Gwynneville, Australia)
David Oldroyd (Newcastle University Business School, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK)

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal

ISSN: 0951-3574

Publication date: 8 May 2009

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to examine the Victorian attitude to the poor by focussing on the health care provided at a large provincial hospital, the Newcastle Infirmary.

Design/methodology/approach

The archives of the Newcastle Infirmary are reviewed alongside the local trade directories. These primary sources are examined in conjunction with the writings of contemporary social theorists on poverty.

Findings

At a time when poverty was seen as a sin, an act against God, it would be easy to assume that the Victorians faced no moral dilemma in dismissing the poor, particularly what were seen as the “undeserving poor”, out of hand. Yet, the paper observes how accounting was used both to persuade the wealthier citizens to contribute funds and to enable the hospital to exercise compassion in treating paupers despite this being prohibited under the hospital's rules. Such a policy conflicted with the dominant utilitarian view of society, which emphasised the twin pillars of economic expediency and self‐help.

Research limitations/implications

More case studies are needed of other hospitals to ascertain how typical the Newcastle Infirmary was of the voluntary hospital sector as a whole.

Originality/value

Although many histories of British hospitals exist and some have examined how accounting was used to manage within these institutions, the concern has not been with accounting as a moral practice.

Keywords

Citation

Holden, A., Funnell, W. and Oldroyd, D. (2009), "Accounting and the moral economy of illness in Victorian England: the Newcastle Infirmary", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 525-552. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570910955434

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2009, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Please note you might not have access to this content

You may be able to access this content by login via Shibboleth, Open Athens or with your Emerald account.
If you would like to contact us about accessing this content, click the button and fill out the form.
To rent this content from Deepdyve, please click the button.