Showing posts with label Poor Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Poor Law. Show all posts

Overseers of the Poor #ParishChest

St James the Less, Pangbourne, Berkshire

Recently I’ve been reading the Berkshire Parish Overseers’ Records. They give a comprehensive view of how the poor and needy were provided for at the end of the 18th century and beginning of the 19th.  The Overseers were respectable men from the middle class selected annually to administer funds available for the poor in their parish.

When there was doubt if an individual came from your parish, Removal or Settlement Orders were made, so that each pauper was helped in their own parish, not a place they had moved to.  In 1816 when her husband was away in the army, Mary Warner was removed from the town of Reading to her home village of Pangbourne, since she would receive no money to support their family from his army pay until he returned home.


Earlier in 1798, one soldier whose wife had been allowed to accompany him, wrote home from the island of Jersey begging for assistance.


The Overseers needed to provide employment for orphans and needy children in their parish and the best solution was a 7 year apprenticeship.  Boys might be sent to a Master to learn skills such as carpentry, shoe-making or barge-building, but it might be husbandry (caring for animals and tilling the soil).  In most cases, girls were apprenticed to learn housewifery.





An apprenticeship established Settlement in a parish, which might explain why the Berkshire Overseers were eager to send their paupers to parishes on the outskirts of London, from where they were unlikely to return.

The other problem they had to deal with was bastardy.  Unmarried pregnant women should preferably be provided for by the man who was responsible.


#Executed for following Captain Swing

Throughout most of the 19th century public executions were carried out on the rooftop of Horsemonger Lane Gaol in Southwark, where the crowd could watch from below.  On January 10th 1831 it was the turn of James Warner from Albury, Surrey to be hanged for arson.  It was believed that he was one of many farm labourers in southern England who had turned to crime to express their anger at low wages and unemployment.



During the Napoleonic Wars there was a great demand for corn and a shortage of labour but after the war ended in 1815, prices slumped and the returning soldiers flooded the job market.  To add to the pressure on rural workers, new mechanised threshing machines took the place of manual threshing with a flail.  Things came to a head after two bad harvests in 1829 and 1830.  Threatening letters were sent to landowners and clergymen by the fictional Captain Swing.  Many respected people, such as William Cobbett felt there was need for electoral reform and better provision for the poor.


But did James Warner act on behalf of his fellow agricultural labourers or was he expressing a personal grievance?  James Franks, the tenant of a corn mill in Albury had employed James Warner, but had sacked him in 1828 after accusing Warner of beating his horse.  At his trial for, “wilfully and maliciously setting fire to a flour mill at Albury,” Richard Tidy, another employee, reported that James Warner had told him Franks would, “get no good by it; he will get served out for.”

On the evening of November 13th 1830, Mr Franks had been entertaining friends in his house next to Albury Mill.  At 4.30 next morning he was woken by the sound and sight of the mill going up in flames.  Going downstairs to see what was going on, he escaped the shattering of his bedroom window by shots from a gun loaded with horseshoe nails, pieces of flint and small pebbles.  The flames showed the figure of a man in a brown frock coat running away from the fire across the neighbouring land of Mr Smallpiece.  Henry Franks, brother of James, and several other witnesses, were able to describe the man, who was easily identified as James Warner.

It was also revealed at the trial that Warner had been drinking in Guildford on the previous evening and he had complained of greedy employers to witnesses, Richard Moore, a painter, Matthew Mansell, a blacksmith, George Wilkinson, a carpenter and James Challing, a sawyer.  His final statement was that if you held a grudge against someone you should act secretly and alone, and that they would learn something of great importance in the morning.  Warner drank at the Queen’s Head and the White Hart all evening before walking to Albury with barmen Thomas Myon and James Niblett, who contacted the police after the fire.  Searching his house, the authorities found a brown frock coat and a recently fired gun.  A full bench of magistrates at Guildford House of Correction committed Warner for trial at Kingston assizes.


On January 1st 1831, the jury rapidly convicted of Warner of arson, although the charge of shooting at Franks was dropped.  But when the judge put on his black cap and sentenced him to death, many thought the penalty too harsh.  He was to be an example to others who protested with violence about their poverty.  In the words of the judge, “You meant to urge others to the commission of crimes, which have of late become so lamentably prevalent and which nothing under God’s providence but the strong arm of the law can check and repress.”



On 8th January 1831 the magistrates at Guildford and Clandon sent letters to the Prime Minister stating that there was evidence to implicate other local people in the crime.  It emerged that on 14th November 1830, the day before the fire, the Home Secretary had received a letter, stating that James Franks had become, “odious to the people when he was lately the overseer of the poor.”  A note was later found near the workhouse in Guildford which said, “Warner is murdered.  Franks, Drummond and Smallpiece shall die….. I could clear him at the place, you false-swearing villain. We fired the mill.  Starving and firing go together.”

Although James Warner was the only agricultural protester to be executed in Surrey, 18 others were sentenced to death in other parts of the country between 1830 and 1832.  505 men were transported to Australia and 644 were imprisoned.  In 1832 the Reform Act was passed in Parliament and in 1834 the Poor Law Amendment Act established a network of inspected Workhouses.  And yet the case of the Tolpuddle Martyrs was still to shock the country in 1834.

For interesting sources about the Swing disturbances go to this page on the National Archives   http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/politics/g5/




A family separated by the Poor Law #Workhouse #Canada

One of the many families split up and spread across the globe in Edwardian times were the LARNER family. In 1858, Thomas Larner was born in Wokingham Workhouse in Berkshire to 16 year old unmarried mother Mary Larner.  By 1861 he and his mother were living with his grandparents Joseph and Ann Larner, but ten years later, 12 year old Thomas and his 75 year old grandmother were living alone, both working as agricultural labourers.

St John's Church, Merrow where many of the children were baptised

At some point after 1871, Thomas joined the army and on being posted to Aldershot, married Mary Jane Ellis from nearby Hartley Witney. They married in Guildford in 1885 and when Thomas left the army a year later, they set up home in 4 Swaynes Cottages in High Path Road, Merrow in Surrey and began, as many couples at that time, to have a great many children.  Mary Jane obviously didn’t like her plain name as her taste for the more exotic emerged in her choice of children’s names.  They were born as follows:

1884       Maria Frances Isabel
1886       Thomas Joseph William
1889       Frederick Ernest Edward
1891       Ivy Elizabeth May
1894       Lewis Leonard George                   died 1917 in Flanders
1897       Albert Henry John                          died 1915 in Flanders
1898       James David                                   died 1898
1899       Rose Kathleen Maud
1901       Violet Mary
1902       Lily Irene Daisy

In Merrow, Thomas Larner became a general labourer but with onset of the Boer War he returned to the army leaving Mary Jane to look after the family.  His son, Thomas Joseph William Larner, left his job as a gardener for Mr Fitzjohn at “The Warrens” and also joined the army.  

Meanwhile Mary Jane was in trouble.

Sussex Agricultural Express 15th April 1890
Barkingside Girls' Village
By 1904 the family were in disarray.  In the absence of her husband Thomas, Mary Jane could not cope with the large family.  Her four youngest children had been taken away.   By 1911 Albert was an inmate of the Gordon Boys School "for necessitous boys" at Bagshot, Lily was one of the few resident children of Guildford Union Workhouse, Rose had been sent by Dr Barnardo's as a British Home child to Canada and Violet was a resident of Barnardo's Girls’ Village at Barkingside in Essex.  Three months later Violet was part of the Barnardo's party on board the Sicilian bound for Quebec.




Thomas had returned to his family and by 1911 he and Mary Jane were living in Aldershot where he worked as a fish hawker.  It is very unlikely that they ever saw or heard of Violet or Rose again.

Sources
British Newspaper Archive
Ancestry.co.uk
http://canadianbritishhomechildren.weebly.com/

Postscript
An update on the Larner children

In the Workhouse Committee Meeting Minutes of November 5th 1904, stored at Surrey History Centre, the following decision by the Board of Guardians to adopt the children who had been "deserted" by their parents Thomas and Mary Jane is reported.


When the girls were set to Dr Barnardo's Village at Barkingside the Guildford Board of Guardians sent five shillings a week for maintenance and clothing of each child.