Migrants welcome? Exploitation, racism & national security

This blog is Part 2 of the series 'Medieval to Modern UK Immigration'.

In Part 1 (Who belongs here?), we saw how immigration to Britain over the centuries has often been determined by the much wider geo-political headwinds and violent power struggles which categorise people’s usefulness along dividing lines of allegiance and religion.

Throughout history, public narratives around migration have broadly oscillated between immigrants’ utility or the ‘inherent threat’ they pose. As such, laws governing British immigration have fixated on separating ‘desirable’ immigrants from ‘undesirable’ ones. To understand the dynamics at work in this context, it is essential to interrogate the purported definition of who or what is ‘desirable’, which actors get to define this, and what they might stand to gain. The public framing of immigration (which ossifies over time) often masks the financial gain, private enterprise, and exploitation driving these narratives. And so, in order to understand immigration policymaking, we must always follow the money and follow the power.

Countless examples from British history show how people with power have often used immigrants for their own financial benefit and to shore up their position in society. It’s worth noting though, that the monarch or politician reputedly ‘in charge’ at any point is often little more than a figurehead, with laws advanced by the powerful assemblage surrounding them (usually for their own personal gain).

And when immigrants’ economic usefulness is spent and societal tensions flare, elites use violent, restrictive, racist laws to protect their position, subdue the lower classes and maintain the status quo. Furthermore, as immigrants are used as political football and bargaining chip, falling in and out of favour, the question of where their allegiance truly lies never goes away (and is always held over the heads of settled ethnic minorities also).

Flemish weavers & The Peasants’ Revolt

The mid- to late-14th century saw some contrasting state interventions regarding immigration. During Edward III’s reign, skilled migrants (specifically weavers) from Flanders were recruited to England to boost the economy, despite protestations from English weavers that the Flemish were unduly benefiting from exemptions and support, undermining their ability to make a living (The Weavers’ Company). From the 1370s, letters of denization could be purchased from the Crown entitling immigrants to be treated as though they were native-born (provided they renounced their former loyalties and pledged allegiance to the King).

In 1377, the Crown ordered the expulsion of all immigrants including monks because they were accused of being spies and a route by which money and resource might move from England to France at a time when the two nations were at war with one another. It also provided the Crown with a convenient source of funds when immigrants were imprisoned and their assets seized (The Suppression of the Alien Priories).

A few years later, The Peasants’ Revolt was provoked by multiple taxes, the most recent of which took no account of people’s means to pay. Ca. 30,000 people marched on London, demanding basic freedoms of movement, work and rent. Simon Sudbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor of England who was leading on the 14-year-old King Richard II’s behalf, was seized and killed. The revolutionaries were also incensed about the presence of Flemish immigrants (mostly weavers) and massacred them through the course of the uprising (Historic Royal Palaces).

‘Societal breakdown’ & scapegoats

Military failures in the Hundred Years’ War with France and domestic disappointments in the 1430s, led to worsening economic conditions and increased hostility towards immigrants. The Flemish were particularly targeted, but also the French and Scottish, often driven by a suspicion that money and resource was being siphoned out of England through these ‘dangerous’ communities. This prompted the presentation of multiple anti-immigrant petitions to Parliament, eventually proposing highly restrictive measures (Our Migration Story)

The Alien Subsidy was implemented by way of response, a new tax on anyone born overseas who was 12 years and older except those exempt. Immigrants were identified by local people by their accent, name and language.  The tax was extremely low (presumably to ensure as many people as possible paid it) and persisted for nearly 50 years with 55,000 immigrants recorded in England over this period (ca. 1-2% of the population). The tax records reveal that many English households had immigrant servants despite a supposed general hostility towards immigration.

Emigration of the Huguenots 1566 - Jan Antoon Neuhuys

Exacerbated by the ostentatious flouting of laws and societal norms by some high profile immigrants, resentment towards immigrants deemed to have prejudicial treatment from the Crown boiled over into a violent riot in the early 1500s (Our Migration Story). Coupled with this, concern grew amongst the ruling classes about increasing numbers of ‘masterless’, wandering poor, representative of societal breakdown and a visible threat to the established order of things. Vagrancy was caused by worsening economic conditions and coincided with the immigration of Romani Gypsies. This led to laws attempting to differentiate between the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving poor’ and came to a head with the 1547 Vagrancy Act which outlawed begging, literally branding vagrants and sentencing them to servitude (Our Migration Story).

Threat of war with France and fear of spies in the 1540s led to Henry VIII making the purchase of letters of denization compulsory for all French immigrants, and all immigrants living on or near the South coast of England had their taxes doubled.

In the late 16th century and early 17th century, opportunistic German merchant Caspar van Senden, with the support of corrupt courtier Sir Thomas Shirley, successfully secured a decree from Elizabeth I, that non-white immigrants (‘Blackamoores’) should be expelled from England. It was common for Black Africans to be employed in English households at the time and the letter scapegoated Black people for hardships caused by failed harvests and concerns about societal breakdown. Van Senden had freed ca. 300 English prisoners from Spain and Portugal and demanded payment from the Crown in the form of possession of Black residents of England, so that he could sell them in Europe. An ultimately unsuccessful venture, Van Senden required permission of Black residents’ masters, which they withheld (National Archives).

Religion & restrictive immigration policy

Between the 1500s and 1600s, international conflict between Catholics and Protestants impacted England, culminating in the gunpowder plot against King James 1. Subsequently, naturalisation took on a religious angle, with immigrants now having to prove that they were part of the Anglican Church.

Seeing the financial benefits enjoyed by Amsterdam when expelled Spanish and Portuguese Jews settled there, Oliver Cromwell readmitted Jews to England in the late 17th century. And so, 366 years since they were expelled by Edward I, Jews returned to England from Holland, Spain and Portugal (BBC.co.uk). They were joined by ca. 50,000 Protestant Huguenot refugees fleeing persecution in France by Louis XIV (Modern History Sourcebook, National Archives).

As part of a dispute between England and Scotland regarding who would take the throne next, England implemented the 1705 Alien Act, cutting off all trade with Scotland. The Act also re-assigned Scots in England as immigrants, threatening inheritance of their estates, unless they re-engaged in unification negotiations with England (Whatley, 2006; Brittanica). Following this, Great Britain became a single state through the 1707 Act of Union.

In 1708, the British government sought to economically exploit highly skilled Protestant weavers fleeing persecution in Europe by encouraging them to settle in Britain, and passed the Foreign Protestants Naturalisation Act (Gov.UK). When more immigrants came than expected (ca. 12,000 in 2 months), concerns about a threat to British national identity led to the Act being repealed in 1711 (Blackstone, 1979).

Amidst the French Revolution and a moral panic about Republican spies, the Aliens Act 1793  was passed to control entry and residence of unwanted refugees (Thomas, 2024). The Act compelled French refugees to fight against the Republic (under threat of deportation). Political debate centred around curtailing the right of asylum, versus abuse of asylum (and a threat to national security) (Roscoe, 1930). The 1798 act was even more draconian, requiring all immigrants to have a licence to live in Britain (Thomas, 2024).

Immigration acts of the late 1700s and early 1800s moved from restrictive at the height of war with France to increasingly liberal once it had ended. After 1814, successive Alien Acts (1826 and 1836) conferred greater rights on immigrants, ultimately resulting in freedom of movement in practice (Roscoe, 1930; Thomas, 2024). 

From the 1880s, 150,000 Eastern European and Russian Jews fled persecution and came to England, with the previously small Jewish community substantially altered as the majority moved into the East End of London. Out of concerns over an anti-semitic backlash in an already overcrowded area, the British Jewish community promoted integration and assimilation (London Museum).

Read Part 3 in this series on Medieval to Modern UK Immigration: ‘How did we get here? A brief (recent) history of UK immigration policy’.